Dismissed

Mukhram Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2025A482/29940/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of a summoning order in a complaint under section 406 IPC concerning an advance paid for fish supply. The Court found prima facie allegations of criminal breach of trust supported by statements under sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., and dismissed the application.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mukhram Nishad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:123377

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29940 of 2024 Applicant :- Mukhram Nishad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Richa Kumari,Yogesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Neeraj Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Yogesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rakesh Kumar Gupta, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the impugned summoning order dated 26.04.2024, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, (Junior Division), Court No.25, Basti, in Complaint Case No. 925 of 2022(Irshad Ali Vs. Korma Rajkumar and another), under section 406 IPC, Police Station Nagar, District Basti, as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.925 of 2022) of the instant complaint case.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is a commercial dispute between the parties and it is alleged that some amount has been paid in cash and some amount has been paid in different accounts as per the instructions of the applicant herein by the opposite party no.2. However, learned counsel for the applicant submits that no amount has been paid to the account of applicant herein. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that the nature of dispute between the parties is civil in nature which has been given a criminal colour. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant seeks quashing of the entire proceeding of the instant case against the applicant herein.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA for the State submits that from the allegations as made in the complaint categorical statement has been made against the applicant herein that he has received a sum of rupees two lacs in cash from the opposite party no.2 and further a huge amount has been transferred by the opposite party no.2 on the instructions of the applicant herein in different accounts as was directed by applicant herein, for the supply of the fishes to the opposite party no.2. However, despite receipt of the said amount from opposite party no.2, the applicant has failed to supply the fishes to the opposite party no.2, as agreed between the parties. Therefore, a clear case of breach of trust by the applicant herein against the opposite party no.2 is made out, as per the allegations made in the complaint, which are duly supported by the statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. In view thereof, no interference is called for in the instant case by this Court.

¶9

Having heard the rival submissions so made by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record shows that from the complaint as well as the statements of the complainant and the witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. it is clear that a categorical allegation has been made that rupees two lacs as advances were paid to the applicant herein by the opposite party no.2 and on different accounts as per the instructions of the applicant herein and a huge sum has also been paid by the opposite party no.2 for supply of the fishes as was agreed between the parties. However, despite payment of the said amount the applicant herein has failed to supply the fishes as was agreed between the parties. Therefore, a primafacie case has been made out against the applicant herein from the allegations of the complaint coupled with the statements of the complainant as well as the witnesses recorded under section

¶10

200 and 202 Cr.P.C., whereupon the trial court has summoned the applicant herein vide order dated 26.04.2024, for the offence under section 406 IPC.

¶11

In view therefor, this Court do not find any ground for interference in the instant case, accordingly the instant application is hereby dismissed .

¶12

Order Date :- 25.7.2025 VKG

¶13

(Anish Kumar Gupta,J.)

¶14

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mukhram Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mukhram Nishad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases