Allowed¶17

Survesh Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2026A482/1367/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 quashing application allowed by Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Rajeev Singh, J., February 20, 2026); summoning order dated 07.05.2025 in Case No.44710 of 2025 (Case Crime No.281 of 2023, Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Gomti Nagar, Lucknow) quashed; charge sheet under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C.; trial for cheating and criminal breach of trust cannot run together per Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. v. State of U.P., Criminal Appeal No. 3114 of 2024; trial court directed to pass fresh order within one month.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; summoning order dated 07.05.2025 quashed; trial court directed to pass fresh order in the light of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra) within one month from production of a certified copy of the order. ¶17

Survesh Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. Thru… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1367 of 2026

¶3

Survesh Sharma And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Abhishek Singh, Sanjana Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 14

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶9

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶10

2. This application has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.44710 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.281 of 2023 under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case, but the Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet under Sections 406, 420 I.P.C. in mechanical manner. It is further submitted that the trial court has also wrongly taken cognizance on the same and summoned the applicant vide impugned order. It is vehemently submitted that the trial for the offence of cheating as well as criminal breach of trust cannot run together. Reliance in support of his argument has been placed by the learned counsel for the applicant on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr. , (Criminal Appeal No. 3114 of 2024) . It is, thus, submitted that the indulgence of this Court is necessary.

¶12

4. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits there is no illegality in the order passed by the trial court. However,

¶13

A482 No. 1367 of 2026

¶14

¶15

he does not dispute on the legal pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra) .

¶16

5. Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the application, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the charge sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer for the offences under Section 406, 420 I.P.C. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra) has categorically laid down that the trial for the offences of cheating as well as criminal breach of trust cannot run together.

¶17

6. In view of above facts and circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned summoning order is liable to be set aside and, therefore, summoning order dated 07.05.2025 is hereby quashed.

¶18

7. The application stands allowed .

¶19

8. Trial court is directed to pass fresh order in the matter in the light of the law laid down in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. (supra), within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶20

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶21

February 20, 2026

¶22

GauraV/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Survesh Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Survesh Sharma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pritam Singh @ Monty Sardar vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Ministry Home Affairs Lko.

Dr. Sushil Kumar Tiwari vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Mini. of Edu. Deptt. of Higher Edu. New Delhi and 3 Others

Kamlesh Mani Chaudhary vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Infrastructure and Industrial Development Lko. and 2 Others

Ram Pal Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Basic Edu. Lko and 2 Others

Amit Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. P.W.D. Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Mayaram vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others