Om Parkash vs State Of Haryana
2022 Latest Caselaw 14507 P&H

235    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                         CRM-M-17699-2022
                                         Date of decision: 16.11.2022

Om Parkash                                                       ...........Petitioner

                                     versus

State of Haryana                                                 .......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR

Present:     Mr. Narender Singh, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, DAG, Haryana.

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking

quashing of FIR No.0714 dated 01.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) under Section

174-A of IPC registered at Police Station Hisar City, Hisar and all

consequential proceedings arising therefrom as well as order dated

07.03.2018 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned trial Court vide which a

direction was issued to register the aforesaid FIR.

Reply filed by the State is already on the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the service

could not be effected upon the petitioner and for that reason, proceedings

under Section 174-A IPC were initiated and FIR No.0714 dated 01.08.2018

was registered.

He further submits that the main dispute which was under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, out of which, proceedings

under Section 174-A of IPC have been emerged, had already been

concluded vide order dated 24.02.2020 passed by the learned JMIC,

Exclusive Court N.I. Act, Hisar as the matter had been compromised

between the parties.

1 of 3

He submits that once the original proceedings have come to an

end with the compromise between the parties, therefore, the present

proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC arising out of the original

proceedings should also come to an end. To support his contention he

relies upon the judgment of this Court passed in 'Aditya Goyal vs. State of

Haryana' CRM-M-11269-2019 decided on 07.05.2019.

In the above said judgment, this Court has quashed the

proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC where the main proceedings have

already been concluded. The relevant portion from Aditya Goyal's case

(Supra) is as under:-

"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 174-A of IPC shall be nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

Learned State counsel, on instructions from the Investigating Officer, has not disputed the factual position.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find merit in the present petition.

Since the main complaint filed by the complainant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act itself stands dismissed as withdrawn by the trial Court keeping in view the fact that petitioner has cleared the entire dues and on the direction of this Court, the petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer and has also deposited the cost of `10,000/- with the Illaqa Magistrate, this Court is of the opinion that continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC shall be an abuse of process of law.

Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstance of the case and also in view of the judgments relied upon by the petitioner, this petition is allowed and order dated 03.12.2018 (Annexure P-1), passed by the trial Court in Criminal Complaint No. 1624/2017 dated 12.09.2017, filed under Section 138 of the N. I. Act, vide which, the petitioner has been declared a proclaimed person as well as other consequential proceedings arising therefrom including FIR No. 66 dated 01.02.2019, registered under Section 174-A IPC at Police Station Jagadhri City, District Yamuna Nagar (Annexure P-2) are hereby quashed."

To the same effect, another judgment passed in 'Lakhwinder

2 of 3

Singh versus State of Punjab' CRM-M-37155-2021 decided on 16.11.2021

also supports the present case.

A perusal of order dated 24.02.2020 passed by the learned

JMIC, Exclusive Court N.I. Act, Hisar, makes it clear that the matter has

been settled between the parties. Consequently, no fruitful purpose would

be served in continuing the proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC.

Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the

impugned FIR No.0714 dated 01.08.2018 (Annexure P-1) under Section

174-A of IPC registered at Police Station Hisar City, Hisar and all

consequential proceedings arising therefrom as well as order dated

07.03.2018 (Annexure P-2) and all subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom, are hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise, qua the

petitioner only.

                                                (NAMIT KUMAR)
16.11.2022                                         JUDGE
Neha

             Whether speaking/reasoned                :      Yes/No
             Whether reportable                       :      Yes/No




                                      3 of 3