Allahabad High Court
MS KSRISTY ENTERPRISES AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- HARVIR SINGH
Holding
The summoning order and the entire proceedings are quashed.
Summary
The applicants filed an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash a summoning order dated 20‑12‑2022 and the entire proceedings in case No. 260139 of 2022 (Manoj v. Ksristy & another), which arose from a complaint under Section 379 IPC. The complaint had named the firms but not the individual proprietor as an accused, raising procedural concerns. The opposite party indicated an intention to withdraw the complaint and pursue separate legal remedies against the proprietor. The High Court examined whether the summoning order and the proceedings should stand despite these irregularities. It held that the order and the proceedings were to be quashed. The court allowed the application and left the parties free to seek any other appropriate legal remedies.
Issues considered
- Whether the summoning order dated 20‑12‑2022 and the ensuing proceedings should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC.
- Whether the failure to name the proprietor as an accused in the original complaint justifies quashing the proceedings.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 156(3), 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379
Subjects
- quash
- Section 482 CrPC
- Section 379 IPC
- summoning order
- procedural irregularity
- complaint
- civil judge
- criminal procedure
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19242 of 2024
Ms Ksristy Enterprises And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashish Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Gurfan Ali, G.A.
Court No. - 82
HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present application has been filed to quash the impugned
summoning order dated 20.12.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge
(S.D.)F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar as wel as entire proceedings
of Case No.260139 of 2022 (Manoj Vs. Ksristy & another), arising out of
Complaint Case No.91 of 2021, under Section 379 IPC, Police Station
Phase-3, NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar, pending before the
learned Civil Judge (S.D.)F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar.
3. From the perusal of the complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2, it
appears that the complainant has arrayed M/s Ksristy Enterprises and
another firm, M/s Kanha Infotech, as parties while moving an application
under Section 156(3) CrPC, but none of the proprietor or partner was
arrayed as an accused in the case, whereas allegations against the
proprietor of M/s Ksristy Enterprises have been alleged in the said
complaint filed by the complainant before the learned Magistrate, the
proprietor was not made a party.
4. At the very outset, without going into the merits of the case, opposite
party no.2 submitted that he shall withdraw his complaint filed before the
learned A.C.J.M., Gautam Budh Nagar and shall take appropriate legal
remedy against the proprietor of both the firms.
5. Under such circumstances, the impugned summoning order dated
A482 No. 19242 of 2024
2
20.12.2022 passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.)F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Gautam
Budh Nagar in Case No.260139 of 2022 (Manoj Vs. Ksristy & another),
arising out of Complaint Case No.91 of 2021, under Section 379 IPC,
Police Station Phase-3, NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar, pending
before the learned Civil Judge (S.D.)F.T.C./A.C.J.M., Gautam Budh
Nagar, is hereby quashed.
6. The application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed to that extent.
7. It is open to both the parties to take such appropriate legal remedy as
may be available to them in law.
(Harvir Singh,J.)
September 8, 2026
Mini
Digitally signed by :-
MINI KANAUJIYA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…