Dismissed¶13

Rajendra Prasad Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2026CRLP/1931/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: writ petition dismissed; alternative remedy before District Court; maintainability; free and fair investigation; Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. (2008) 2 SCC 409; FIR No. 0058 of 2026 (10.02.2026); FIR No. 0078 of 2026 (11.02.2026); Police Station Vibhuti Khand, Lucknow; State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Court No. 10; Rajnish Kumar, J.; Zafeer Ahmad, J.; decided 27 February 2026; counsel Raghvendra Pandey for petitioner; G.A./AGA for State.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. ¶13

Rajendra Prasad Maurya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 1931 of 2026

¶3

Rajendra Prasad Maurya

¶4

.....Petitioner(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Petitioner(s)	: Raghvendra Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 10

¶10

HON'BLE RAJNISH KUMAR, J. HON'BLE ZAFEER AHMAD, J.

¶11

Heard Sri Raghvendra Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the State.

¶12

This petition has been filed with five prayers, however, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has come to the Court only for prayer no. 3, which is for free and fair investigation in FIR No. 0058 of 2026 dated 10.02.2026 registered at Police Station Vibhuti Khand, District Lucknow, and FIR No. 0078 of 2026 dated 11.02.2026 registered at the same police station, in regard to which learned AGA submits that, the petition is not maintainable because the petitioner has a remedy before the District Court in view of the judgement of the apex court in the case of Sakiri Vasu vs. State of U.P. reported in (2008) 2 SCC 409 , which could not be disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶13

In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

¶14

February 27, 2026 Fahim/-

¶15

(Zafeer Ahmad,J.) (Rajnish Kumar,J.)

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAHIM AKHTAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Prasad Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad Maurya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mansokh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Meeraj Hussain and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

X Complainant of Case Crime No. 0031/2026 P.S. Pihari Distt. Hardoi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shailendra Kumar Mishra @ Banwari and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Enugu Raji Reddy vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Prema vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others