Chatar Sein v. Rahul Kumar

Heard Mr. Pratikdhar Dwivedi, the learned counsel for petitioner and the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3.

Perused the record.

Petitioner Chatar Sein has approached this court by means of present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition challenging the FIR dated 24.01.2025 lodged by first informant respondent 4 Jitendra Kumar Tyagi, Sub Inspector, Bidauli Police Out Post Incharge, P.S. Jhinjhana, District Shamli and registered as Case Crime No. 483 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 317(1) of BNS and Section 10 of U.P. Control of Goondas act 1970, Section 3,25, 27 of Arms Act 1959, Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number. The FIR giving rise to present Criminal Misc. Writ Petition has been lodged by first informant respondent 4, who is Sub Inspector, Police Out Post Incharge, Bidauli. Learned counsel for petitioner has then submitted that the complicity of the petitioner in crime in question is alleged to have emerged in the confessional statement of co-accused Chaman, who was arrested from the spot. He, therefore, submits that though confessional statement of an accused is not completely inadmissible in evidence but it is a weak type of evidence and can be relied upon only after 2 CRLP No. 672 of 2026 consideration. It is thus contended that there is no material on record on the basis of which prima facie the complicity of the petitioner in crime in question could be conclusively concluded. At this juncture, the learned counsel for petitioner referred to the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Jogendra Singh Vs. State of Punjab AIR 1985 SC and on basis thereof it is contended that since cogent and reliable evidence has emerged against petitioner therefore the liberty of petitioner is liable to be protected by this court. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the police has maliciously implicated the petitioner in the case crime no. 456 of 2024. He accordingly approached this court by filing Crl. Misc. Application No. 528 BNSS No. 34109 of 2025 Chatar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another in which this court has passed an interim order dated 07.10.2024, Copy of the same is on record as page 33 of the paper book. On the aforesaid premise, the learned counsel for petitioner thus submits that the impugned FIR is, therefore, liable to be quashed by his court.

Per contra the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3 has vehemently opposed the present writ petition. Learned A.G.A. submits that the issue as to whether the petitioner is involved in the crime in question or not is a question of investigation and can be determined only in the course of investigation and not at this stage.

It is thus confronted by the learned A.G.A. that no good or sufficient ground has emerged to quash the impugned FIR.

Be that as it may, having heard, the learned counsel for petitioner, the learned A.G.A. representing State respondents 1,2 and 3 and upon perusal of record and the particularly the order dated 7.10.2025 passed by this court (Annexure-2 to the writ petition), we are of the view that the matter requires consideration.

Notice on behalf of State respondents has been accepted by learned A.G.A.

Issue notice to first informant respondent4.

Steps for service upon respondent 4 shall be taken by the learned 3 CRLP No. 672 of 2026 counsel for petitioner within the time period prescribed under the Rules of court.

All the respondents may file their respective counter affidavit within six weeks. Petitioner will have two weeks thereafter to file the rejoinder affidavit.

List this writ petition for admission on 07.04.2026 before appropriate bench.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions urged by the learned counsel for petitioner in support of present writ petition as noted here in above, as an interim measure it is hereby provided that until further orders of this court petitioner shall not be arrested in Case Crime No. 483 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 317(1) of BNS and Section 10 of U.P. Control of Goondas act 1970, Section 3,25, 27 of Arms Act 1959, Police Station Jhinjhana, District Shamli.

The matter shall not be treated as tied up or part heard to this bench. Assignment if any stands discharged. February 3, 2026 RPD (Lakshmi Kant Shukla,J.) (Rajeev Misra,J.)