SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(P&H) 1901

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Jasjit Singh Bedi, J.
Sanjay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana – Respondent
CRM-M-11107-2024
Decided on : 01-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Rupinder Singh Jhand, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

ORDER :

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. (Oral) :

This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR No.310 dated 07.04.2020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A of IPC, 1860 at Police Station HTM Hisar, District Hisar, Haryana which was registered consequent to the order dated 19.12.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hisar (Annexure P-4) declaring the petitioner as proclaimed person in a complaint case under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The brief facts of the case are that in discharge of his legal liability, the petitioner/accused issued a cheque No. 067179 dated 29.07.2017 for an amount of Rs. 25,500/- in favour of the complainant. The said cheque came to be dishonoured. Pursuant thereto, as no payment was made in lieu of the dishonoured cheque, a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act came to be instituted against the petitioner/accused and he was summoned to face trial. Subsequently, he was declared a proclaimed person vide order dated 19.12.2022 (Annexure P-4).

3. Thereafter, a compromise was effected between the parties and the complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the order dated 23.06.2020 (Annexure P-5). In view of the dismissal of the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on the basis of the compromise, the present petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR No.310 dated 07.04.2020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A of IPC, 1860 at Police Station HTM Hisar, District Hisar, Haryana came to be registered.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submits that he had wrongly been declared a proclaimed person and on learning about the same, the petitioner compromised the matter with the complainant. Thereafter, on 23.06.2020, the counsel for the complainant in the Trial Court got recorded his statement that as per his instructions, the complainant did not want to proceed further with the present complaint and wanted to withdraw the same. Based on the said statement, the complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn on 23.06.2020.

The learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and has submitted that the FIR has been correctly registered.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paper-book.

5. From the above-said facts and circumstances, it is apparent that the present FIR was registered in view of the fact that the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed person in the proceeding under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The impugned complaint itself has been withdrawn.

6. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-43813-2018 titled as "Baldev Chand Bansal vs. State of Haryana and another", decided on 29.01.2019 has held as under:-

"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.64 dated 15.02.2017 filed under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula and all other subsequent proceedings arising thereof as well as order dated 24.10.2016 passed by the trial Court vide which a direction was issued to register the aforesaid FIR.

xxx xxx xxx

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decisions rendered by this Court in " Vikas Sharma vs. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another (supra), 2017, (3) L.A.R.584, Microqual Techno Limited and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2015 (32) RCR (Crl.) 790 and "Rajneesh Khanna Vs. State of Haryana and another" 2017(3) L.A.R. 555 wherein in an identical circumstance, this Court has held that since the main petition filed under Section 138 of the Act stands withdrawn in view of an amicable settlement between the parties, therefore, continuation of proceedings under Section 174A of IPC shall be nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

xxx xxx xxx

In view of the same, I find merit in the present petition and accordingly, present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 24.10.2016 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Panchkula as well as FIR No.64

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top