Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 11843 (ALL)

CHANDRASHEKHAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/2693/2025 · 2025-08-19

Deepak Verma

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142202 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2693 of 2025 Applicant :- Chandrashekhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Kumar Soni,Vinod Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar Singh,G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant, today in the Court, are taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 13.06.2024, summoning order dated 05.08.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4115 of 2024, C.N.R. No. UPJS160046962024 (State Vs. Chandrashekhar) arising out of Case Crime No. 0175 of 2023, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Mauranipur, District Jhansi pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Mauranipur, District Jhansi. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been roped in the present case due to mala fide intention. He further submits that summoning and cognizance order passed under section 420 & 406 I.P.C. is in violation of Apex Court judgment passed in Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2248. The offece of cheating viz-a-viz criminal breach of trust are independent and distinct and both cannot exist simultaneously and on this account alone the impugned summoning order is liable to be set aside. 5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that perusal of the F.I.R., clearly shows that cognizable offence against the applicant is made out. The criminal proceedings against the applicant cannot be said to be abuse of process of Court. There is no illegality in the impugned summoning order and instant 482 Cr.P.C. application is liable to be dismissed. 6. Considering the arguments advanced by the counsels as well as in view of the Apex Court Judgment passed in Delhi Race Club (Supra), the petition is disposed of with direction that applicant shall move discharge application within two weeks before the trial court, and if discharge application is filed on behalf of the applicant before the court concerned within two weeks, it is expected that the court concerned will consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of four weeks in accordance with law. Till the disposal of discharge application, no coercive action will be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Vibha Singh Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad