Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 71435 (ALL)

AMIT KUMAR CHAUDHARY v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/24086/2025 · 2025-07-23

Raj Beer Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121392 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24086 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Kumar Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Rai,Om Prakash Rai 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 21.03.2025 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 27.03.2025, of Case No. 3793 of 2025 (State Vs. Amit), arising out of Case Crime No.416 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 IPC, P.S.- Madhuban Bapudham, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C.- Ist, Ghaziabad. 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 27.03.2025 applicant has been summoned for offence under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 506 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 27.03.2025 applicant has been summoned under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C., besides Sections 467, 468, 471, 506 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 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. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 27.03.2025 qua the applicant, passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.) / F.T.C.- Ist, Ghaziabad 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 :- 24.7.2025 'SP'/- Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad