PRABHAT CHANDRA TRIPATHI, J. - (1.) Heard Sri B.B. Paul, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.P. Giri, learned counsel for the respondent no.7 and Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
(2.) The petitioners have made following prayer: "(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari, calling for record of the case, quashing proceeding of Case Crime No.0194 of 2016, under Sections 109, 304 and 336 I.P.C., Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi including first information report of respondents 2nd set dated 26.7.2016 (Annexure-1). (ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to arrest the petitioners in Case Crime No.0194 of 2016, under Sections 109, 304 and 336 I.P.C., Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi without considering necessary of their arrest. (iii) To issue ad interim mandamus, staying arrest of petitioner in Case Crime No.0194 of 2016, under Sections 109, 304 and 336 I.P.C., Police Station Aurai, District Bhadohi arising out of first information report of respondents 2nd set dated 26.7.2016 (Annexure-1). (iv) To issue any other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. (v) To award cost of petition to the petitioners."
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that running of an educational institution is not a crime and no offence has been committed by the petitioners. It has also been submitted that the law should not be emotional and much emphasis was also laid upon the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. reported in 1994 SCC (4) 260.;