JUDGMENT :

Harpreet Singh Brar J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has approached this Court by filing present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the following on the basis of settlement/compromise in the shape of 'No Dues Certificate' dated 04.11.2022 (Annexure P-6): -

- Judgement of conviction dated 21.12.2016 and order of sentence dated 23.12.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hisar in criminal complaint no.387-11 of 2016 dated 04.03.2016 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, whereby, the petitioner has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay the cheque amount as compensation to the complainant, and

- Order dated 15.11.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, whereby, the appeal filed by the petitioner against the abovesaid judgement of conviction has been dismissed, and

- Order dated 25.11.2021 (Annexure P-4) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hisar vide which the petitioner has been declared a 'proclaimed person' as well as subsequent FIR No.209 (Annexure P-5) dated 07.05.2022 under Section 174-A IPC registered at Police Station Urban Estate, Hisar.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was granted a KCC loan of Rs. 12,80,000/- and a term loan of Rs.6,40,000/- by respondent no.2-complainant Bank. As per the loan agreement, the KCC loan was agreed to be repayable after every half year and the term loan in half yearly installments. In order to discharge his said legal liability towards respondent no.2 Bank, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing no.064312 dated 21.01.2016 of Rs. 12,80,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Hisar. Upon its presentation for encashment, the said cheque was dishonoured vide bank memo dated 02.02.2016 with remarks 'Insufficient Funds'. Thereafter, a legal notice dated 02.02.2016 was issued to the petitioner by respondent no.2, calling upon him to make the requisite payment. However, the petitioner failed to repay the requisite amount and aggrieved by the same, respondent no.2 preferred the above-mentioned complaint.

3. The learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence on record, concluded that the aforesaid cheque was issued by the petitioner in favour of respondent no.2 bank in discharge of legally enforceable liability and the necessary ingredients under Sectionl38 being made out, thereby, convicted the petitioner of the aforesaid offence and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year along with compensation to the tune of the aforesaid cheque amount (12,80,000/-) to be paid to respondent no.2. The petitioner was further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months in case of default on payment of the compensation amount.

4. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the abovesaid conviction and sentence which was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court vide order dated 15.11.2019 (Annexure P-2), upholding the abovesaid judgement of conviction and order of sentence. Since, the petitioner was absent from the Court on 15.11.2019, the learned lower Appellate Court also issued direction to the learned trial Court to issue process against the petitioner to apprehend him and to implement the impugned judgement of conviction and order of sentence.

5. The petitioner, aggrieved by the abovesaid orders of the learned Courts below, filed a revision petition before this Court which was dismissed vide order dated 09.09.2021 (Annexure P-3).

6. When the mandatory period of 30 days from the date of issuance of proclamation against the petitioner expired and he still did not put in his appearance before the learned trial Court, he was declared as 'proclaimed person' vide order dated 25.11.2021. In compliance of this order, the above-mentioned impugned FIR No. 209 dated 07.05.2022 came to be registered against the petitioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court by w