MOHD. SHAKIR KHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME U.P. LKO. AND ANOTHER
A482/9031/2025 · 2025-10-30
Pramod Kumar Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 178472 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 178472 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9031 of 2025 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including chargesheet No. 299 of 2016, dated 30.08.2016 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 01.12.2016 passed by learned CJM, Gonda in Criminal Case No. 3242 of 2016, now case No. 313 of 2017; State Vs. Mohd. Shakir Khan, arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2016, under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the First Information Report has been lodged making false allegations. It is further submitted that by impugned order dated 01.12.2016, the applicant has been summoned for offence under Sections 420, 406 IPC and as per law laid down in case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and Others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another 2024 SCC Online SC 2248, offence 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. Perusal of record shows that by impugned order dated 01.12.2016, the applicant has been summoned under Sections 420, 406 IPC. As Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dileep Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohd. Shakir Khan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
stated above, in case of Delhi Race Club (supra), it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that offence of cheating viz-a-viz criminal breach of trust are independent and distinct and the same cannot exist simultaneously in same set of facts and that they are antithetical to each other. Thus, it is clear that impugned summoning order is not in accordance with law. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 01.12.2016, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court concerned to pass the order on the point of summoning afresh, expeditiously in accordance with law. The instant application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of in above terms.
October 30, 2025 kkv/ A482 No. 9031 of 2025 2 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench