Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111006 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22444 of 2025 Applicant :- Nisha Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Kumar Singh,Vikrant Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application u/s 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 20.09.2020 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 27.11.2020, of Case No. 20019 of 2020 (State Vs. Nisha Devi and another), arising out of Case Crime No.95 of 2020, under Sections 419, 420, 406 IPC, P.S.- Chiluwatal, District- Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur. 3. 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 27.11.2020 applicant has been summoned for offence under Sections 419, 420, 406 I.P.C. 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. 4. Perusal of record shows that by impugned order dated 27.11.2020 applicant has been summoned under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., besides Section 419 IPC. As 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 thus, the same cannot exist simultaneously in same set of facts and that they are antithetical to each other. It may also be stated that impugned summoning order has been passed in a printed proforma by merely filling in details of case like case number, sections, name of accused etc. and on this ground also impugned order is not sustainable. Thus, it is clear that impugned summoning order is not in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 27.11.2020, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur 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. 6. The application u/s 528 BNSS is finally disposed of in above terms. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad