Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Vaibhav Srivastava vs State Of U P And Others

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|25 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 1
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 26803 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vaibhav Srivastava Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Deepak Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Deepak Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Irshad Husain, learned Brief Holder appearing for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The relief sought in this petition is for quashing of the F.I.R. dated 31.08.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 749 of 2018, under Sections 326, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station-Sadar Bazar, District Shahjahanpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a teacher of an institution and it is alleged that the petitioner has slapped the student of Class VII. It is further submitted that the petitioner has made a complaint to the respondent no. 4 regarding short attendance of his son. He is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are absolutely false, frivolous and baseless. From a perusal of the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner, hence, the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for quashing of the F.I.R. which discloses cognizable offence.
The Full Bench of this Court in Ajit Singh @ Muraha v. State of U.P. (2006 (56) ACC 433) reiterated the view taken by the earlier Full Bench in Satya Pal v. State of U.P. (2000 Cr.L.J. 569) after considering the various decisions including State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (AIR 1992 SC 604) that there can be no interference with the investigation or order staying arrest unless cognizable offence is not ex-facie discernible from the allegations contained in the F.I.R. or there is any statutory restriction operating on the power of the Police to investigate a case.
From the perusal of the FIR, prima facie it cannot be said that no cognizable offence is made out. Hence no ground exists for quashing of the F.I.R. or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh-I, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.) Order Date :- 25.9.2018 AU
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Vaibhav Srivastava vs State Of U P And Others

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
25 September, 2018
Judges
  • Ramesh Sinha
Advocates
  • Deepak Kumar Srivastava