CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 05 UK CK 0749

Furqan vs State Of Uttarakhand And Ors.

Uttarakhand High Court · Decided on 15 May 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Pankaj Purohit, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition Criminal No. 464 Of 2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 340 words

Pankaj Purohit, J

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

By means of the present writ petition, petitioner has put to challenge the FIR No.29 of 2025 dated 30.01.2025, under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S. Act, 2023, registered with Police Station Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that on 30.01.2025, respondent No.3-informant lodged an FIR with the averments that on the intervening night of 28/29.01.2025, when he was sleeping with his family, at about 02:00-03:00 at midnight, two masked persons entered into his house and looted cash and jewellery on gun point and ran away from the place of incident.

4.

It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the FIR was lodged against the two unknown persons and the petitioner was not named in the FIR; the FIR was lodged with a delay of more than 24 hours and the reason of delay has not been described in the body of the FIR; petitioner has falsely been implicated by the respondent No.3. It is further contended by him that the FIR in the matter is completely based on the story narrated by the respondent No.2, there is no direct evidence against the petitioner and in the absence of any creditable evidence against the petitioner, no offence under Section 309(4) B.N.S. is made out.

5.

Per contra, learned State Counsel supported the story narrated in the FIR and submits that prima-facie, the offence under Section 309(4) B.N.S. is made out.

6.

From perusal of the first information report, this Court is of the view that prima-facie, the commission of cognizable offence is made out against the petitioner. The offence alleged against the petitioner is very serious in nature, therefore, this Court doesn’t want to interfere with the impugned FIR. Moreover, prima-facie, the offence is made out. The name of the petitioner cropped up during investigation. He deserves no protection from this Court. Accordingly, the present criminal writ petition is dismissed in-limine.

7.

Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly.