Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 85212 (ALL)

TARA DEVI AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/30156/2025 · 2025-09-08

Raj Beer Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 30156 of 2025 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJ BEER SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 25.01.2025 as well as cognizance / summoning order dated 28.03.2025, of Case Crime No. 27 of 2025, (State V. Tara Devi & Ors.), under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(3) BNS, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Ballia, pending in the court of C.J.M., Ballia. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and no prima-facie case is made out against them. It is further submitted that by impugned order applicants have been summoned for offence under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(3) BNS 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 applicants have been summoned for the offence under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 351(3) BNS. 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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Awadesh Tiwari, Gunjan Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Tara Devi And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) that impugned summoning order is not in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order dated 28.03.2025, passed by the C.J.M., Ballia 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 under Section 528 BNSS is disposed of in above terms. September 9, 2025 Anand NA528 No. 30156 of 2025 2 (Raj Beer Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad