Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 135698 (ALL)

SUGAM JAIN THRU. HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER ANIL KUMAR MISHRA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS SECY. HOME DEPTT. AND 3 OTHERS

CRLP/3542/2025 · 2025-05-02

Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, Vivek Chaudhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25320-DB Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 3542 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sugam Jain Thru. His Power Of Attorney Holder Anil Kumar Mishra And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J. Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State- opposite parties no.1 to 3 and perused the material on record. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of the First Information Report No. 248 of 2024, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow South (Commissionerate). Petitioners also pray for directing the respondents not to arrest them in the aforesaid case crime number. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there is no breach of trust; the shipment allegedly lost during courier transit for which petitioners' company is not liable under the terms of the contract. No allegation of criminal breach of trust with the respondent no. 4 or misappropriation of amount is made out against the petitioners. 4. Learned AGA submitted that the petitioners' company has committed breach of trust and the shipments were not supplied to the consignees. 5. There is specific allegation made in the FIR that Courier company has been taking goods from the opposite party no. 4 but that had not been supplied to the consignees and kept by the courier company and the goods are never supplied nor returned to the seller, therefore, it is a clear case of breach of trust against the courier company and thus, we do not find it to be a fit case for interfering with the impugned first information report. 6. The writ petition is dismissed. . (R.M.N. Mishra, J.) (Vivek Chaudhary, J.) Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Dhirendra/ Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench