Killed by police or in hiding: Allahabad HC orders CBI probe into ‘disappearance’ of man with 30 criminal cases

Killed by police or in hiding: Allahabad HC orders CBI probe into 'disappearance' of man with 30 criminal cases At the hearing on August 31, the SHO of the Purkazi police station informed that a special team had been constituted to trace Muttliv.

Key points

• The court, in its August order, had stated that the warrant was received by the police station on June 18.
• The court then directed the police to bring the general diary entry of the police station of May 13 on the next date of hearing on June 18.
• The court questioned the SHO if any statement of the persons known to Muttliv had been recorded and whether anyone had seen him on May 4.
• The court created the observation while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed through Alam.
• Either way, an answer with regard to the whereabouts of Muttliv is absolutely essential.

According to the facts submitted before the court, Muttliv is stated to be a history sheeter with regarding 30 criminal cases registered against him at various police stations of Muzaffarnagar.

In practice, the Allahabad High Court has ordered CBI to probe into the disappearance of a man with 30 criminal cases in Muzaffarnagar district and sought a preliminary report after three weeks, suspecting either local police may have killed him or he is hiding to escape the legal proceedings.

Notably, the court created the observation while hearing a habeas corpus petition filed through Alam. This person stated that his brother, Muttliv, was issued from jail on May 4 this year and shortly after, the police team of Purkazi police station of Muzaffarnagar district allegedly picked up Muttaliv and their father Sharafat, and detained both. He further alleged that while his father was published on May 7, Muttliv remains missing since then. Nevertheless, the police have denied any detention and maintained that they, too, were searching for Muttaliv to serve warrants issued by local court against him.

"Either way, an answer with regard to the whereabouts of Muttliv is absolutely essential. If he is dead, his remains must be discovered and responsibility must be fixed under the relevant provisions of law. If he is alive, he must be apprehended so that he may not escape the process of justice by concealing himself. Therefore, this Court feels that the local police are unable to carry out an unbiased investigation either on account of lack of competence or deliberate delay in an attempt to procrastinate the proceeding before this Court, " the bench stated.

According to The court order in this case on August 11, as per the police record, Muttaliv is allegedly a recidivist and a compulsive criminal whose life of crime stretches from 2007 to 2017. The police, through the administration counsel, submitted before the court that after Muttliv was issued from jail on May 4, the police have been searching for him for the execution of a warrant issued by the trial court in a 2012 case.

Notably, the court, in its August order, had stated that the warrant was received by the police station on June 18. It was additionally the date on which a non-bailable warrant (NBW) was issued by the trial court. Nevertheless, the administration counsel submitted that the warrant was issued on May 13.

Notably, the court, in that order, had questioned the police claim stating."how the police was attempting to execute an N.B.W. Even before it was issued by the learned trial court, so as to search for the petitioner on 04.05.2026."

According to The court additionally had, it is not in the practice of the trial court to repeatedly problem NBWs when the first one itself has not been executed. The court then directed the police to bring the general diary entry of the police station of May 13 on the next date of hearing on June 18.

Meanwhile, the bench, in the order, expressed displeasure stating police were acting in a "casual and cavalier manner" as the GD entries show they are going around public gatherings like bus stands, administration offices, etc and pasting Muttliv's photograph. The court questioned the SHO if any statement of the persons known to Muttliv had been recorded and whether anyone had seen him on May 4. According to The bench additionally, when the SHO was asked whether statements of Muttliv's relatives, neighbours, friends and other associates were recorded to inquire his whereabouts the answer is disappointingly in the negative. The same demonstrates that there is "no action on the part of the police in right earnest with the intention of discovering the whereabouts of Muttliv, but instead, the police is managing to prolong the matter before this Court".

"This Court deems it essential to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation through its office which is relevant for the investigations to be carried out in the State of Uttar Pradesh, to take the case diary of this matter from the police and carry out the investigation into the disappearance of Muttliv, " the bench remarked.

Meanwhile, the bench has directed the CBI to investigate into the aberrations in the police records relating to the receipts and execution of the warrants, the manipulation of the date by scratching out the entry relevant for non-bailable warrants purported to have been issued against Muttliv. This was admitted to by the SHO in his affidavit stating that the scratching was done by the constable concerned who was filling up the records and was an act of inadvertence and carelessness. When asked regarding the action taken against the erring constable and whether an inquiry was conducted to ascertain if the manipulation was accidental or intentional, the SHO had no answer, the bench stated in its order.

In short, killed by police or in hiding: Allahabad HC orders CBI probe into is the central thread here, and readers can expect follow-up reporting as the picture becomes clearer.