HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 29272 of 2025 Court No. - 71 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 06.10.2014 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 02.02.2016, of Case No. 536 of 2016, arising out of Case Crime No.337 of 2014, under Sections 420, 406 IPC, P.S.- Hapur Nagar, District- Hapur, pending in the court of CJM, Hapur. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and no prima-facie case is made out against him. It was submitted that the dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature. Applicant is residing in Delhi and that no notice or warrant has been served upon him and thus, applicant could not challenge the impugned proceedings or summoning order well within time and as soon as he came to know about the impugned proceedings, he has filed the present application. It was further submitted that by impugned order applicant has been summoned for offence under Sections 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, the 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 applicant has been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Kumar Maurya, Arvind Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vishal Mittal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) summoned for the offence under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C. As stated above, in case of Delhi Race Club (supra), it has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court that the offence of cheating viz-a-viz criminal breach of trust are independent and distinct and both 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 02.02.2016, passed by the CJM, Hapur is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the court concerned to pass an order on the point of summoning afresh, expeditiously in accordance with law. 6. The application under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. September 16, 2025 Anand NA528 No. 29272 of 2025 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad