The court emphasized that a plea of alibi may be raised at any stage, including during investigation, and must be substantiated by credible evidence for the trial court's consideration.

1. The petitioner has preferred this Misc. petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short as 'Cr.P.C.') for quashment of the order dated 04.11.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate, I Class, Mehgaon District Bhind in R.C.T No.167 of 2023 whereby, the closure report filed by the respondent no.2 has been rejected and the cognizance of offences under Sections 302 , 307, 294, 147, 148, 149 read with Section 120-B of I.P.C and under Section 25 /27 of the ARMS ACT was taken against the petitioner.

1A. As per order for nomination of Bench passed by Hon'ble the Chief Justice, it has been directed that this court will also hear the Cr. Revision No.6219 of 2024 along with connected three M.C.R.Cs.Therefore, this M.Cr.C. is being heard and decided by this Court.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, respondent No.3/complainant Manoj Nalishi at PS Mehgaon stating that on account of previous enmity, accused persons namely: Narendra Tyagi, Prem Sagar, Vivek Tyagi, Saurabh, Pramod, Jitendra, Gaurav, Anil, Shiv Sagar, Prashant, Vikas, Ramanand, Anoop, Rahul Tyagi, Rahul Rajawat, Vishal Tyagi and Surya Narayan armed with guns and sticks came near Panchayat Bhawan on 15.01.2023 at around 10 a.m and started hurling abuses and firing, as a result, Hakim Prasad Tyagi, Golu @ Anuj and Pinku @ Dhirendra Tyagi had sustained bullet injuries due to which they died, thereafter, the accused persons ran away from there. The said incident was witnessed by Manoj and Lokesh Tyagi. After inquiry of the said Dehati Nalishi, an FIR bearing Crime no. 10 / 23 was registered under sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149, 294, 120-B of IPC and 25 / 27 of ARMS ACT against the accused persons including the present petitioner Nishant @ Bunty Tyagi.

3. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet has been filed against 13 accused persons but the investigation was kept open against the present petitioner and his father Narendra Tyagi and three other persons under section 173(8) of Cr.P.C. Subsequently, the investigation was handed over to the C.I.D and on the basis of the statements of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C and the CCTV Cameras installed in different places, it has been found that the petitioner's father Narendra Tyagi was not present on the place of incident and at the relevant time, he was present at Shri Ramchandra Mission Heart Fullness Center, Gwalior. Therefore, Narendra Tyagi was exonerated but the investigation was kept open against the petitioner and according to the investigation conducted by the CID, it was found that the petitioner was not present at the place of incident at the relevant time and he was present at Gwalior which is about 60-70 Kms away from the place of occurrence. On the basis of the detailed investigation conducted by the CID, no tempering was found in the CCTV Cameras, pen-drive and hard-disc and after the investigation, it has been held by the investigating officer that the petitioner has not conspired to commit murder of three deceased persons and other offences. Therefore, the closure report under Section 169 of Cr.P.C has been submitted by the CID before the court of J.M.F.C, Mehgaon. The J.M.F.C. Mehgaon has rejected the same and took cognizance for the aforesaid offences and straightway issued warrant of arrest against him. Being aggrievedby the same, the petitioner has preferred this petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the matter with malafide in