HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7996 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Wasim Ahmad, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Kumar Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. 2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the validity of an order dated 14.03.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Biswan, Sitapur in Criminal Case No.255 of 2020, whereby the complaint of the petitioner has been dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. The petitioner had also challenged the aforesaid order by filing a Criminal Revision No.46 of 2024, which has been dismissed by means of a judgment and order dated 13.05.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (A.O.W.), Sitapur and the petitioner has challenged the validity of the revisional order also. 3. The petitioner had filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. against eight persons, including the opposite parties no.4 and 5 who are Director and Manager of Alpis Global School, Amarnagar, Biswan stating that the informant's son was a student of Class-VII in Alpis Global School. He had gone to attend a picnic in Anandi Water Park, Lucknow on 11.05.2016 along with other students and staffs of the school. He fell ill in the water park but the Manager and teachers of the school did not got him treated and did not intimate the child's family members about his illness. The informant's son was left in the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Wasim Ahmad Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Mohammad Khursheed .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) school at about 7.00 p.m. The petitioner took him to Community Health Centre, Biswan, Sitapur from where he was referred to Lucknow. The petitioner got his son admitted in numerous hospitals at Lucknow and lastly he was admitted to Icon Hospital, where he died during treatment on 17.05.2016. The petitioner alleged that his child died due to negligence. 4. On the direction of the court F.I.R. No.380 of 2016 was registered in Police Station Biswan, District Sitapur under Sections 279, 304-A I.P.C. However, during investigation the offences could not be established and a closure report was submitted by the Investigating Officer. 5. The petitioner has submitted a protest application which was registered as a complaint. The complainant got his statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C. recorded, wherein he supported the F.I.R. version. Two witnesses were also examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. who also supported the F.I.R. version. Initially the Judicial Magistrate had passed an order dated 24.02.2020 summoning the opposite party nos.4 and 5 to face trial under Sections 279, 304-A I.P.C. However, the aforesaid order was set aside by means of a judgment and order dated 05.11.2022, passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.12, Sitapur in Criminal Revision No.77 of 2022 and the matter was remanded for being decided afresh. 6. After remand the Magistrate has passed the impugned order dated 14.03.2024 holding that the victim has died on 17.05.2016 due to sudden cardio respiratory arrest. No material has come to light which may establish that the accused persons are responsible for death of the petitioner's son. The death certificate mentions the probable disease as "GBS e Low G.C." which was not aggravated or initiated because of any action of opposite parties no.4 and 5. 7. In revision, the revisional court found no error or illegality in the impugned order dated 14.03.2024, passed by the Judicial Magistrate. 8. Assailing the validity of the aforesaid orders, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner's son has died due CRLP No. 7996 of 2025 2 to negligence of opposite parties no.4 and 5 and, therefore, they are liable to be summoned for facing trial for offences under Sections 304-A and 279 I.P.C. 9. Section 304-A I.P.C. provides that "whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both." 10. There is no allegation that the opposite parties no.4 and 5 were accompanying the child on picnic on the date of the incident i.e. on 11.05.2016. There is no allegation that they had committed any 'act' which caused death of the petitioner's son. There is no medical evidence in support of the allegation that any act done by the opposite parties no.4 and 5 has caused death of petitioner's son. Therefore, the allegations even prima facie do not make out commission of offence under Section 304-A I.P.C. 11. Section 279 I.P.C. deals with rash driving or ride on a public way and there is no allegation which may attract the provisions of Section 279 I.P.C. 12. From the aforesaid discussions, I am of the view that the there appears to be no error or illegality in the impugned orders 14.03.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Biswan, Sitapur in Criminal Case No.255 of 2020 and the judgment and order dated 13.05.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. (A.O.W.), Sitapur in Criminal Revision No.46 of 2024. 13. The petition lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed at the admission stage. September 2, 2025 Ram. CRLP No. 7996 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench