Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pankaj Dayal vs State Of Haryana And Another on 2 June, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081372
CRM-M-29317-2023 2023:PHHC:081372 -1-
(135) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-29317-2023
Date of Decision:02.06.2023
Pankaj Dayal ... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present : Mr. Sunil Chadda, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Tara Dutt, Advocate for the petitioner.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J. (Oral)
The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has come before this
Court to quash order dated 25.01.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist
Class, Panchkula as well as FIR No.70 dated 12.02.2023, under Section 174-A
IPC registered at Police Station Sector-7, Panchkula, District Panchkula and all the
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
Learned senor counsel for the petitioner at the very out-set submitted
that matter between the parties have been resolved by making payment qua the
cheque in question which is pending for encashment. To await the encashment and
to ensure that the cheque is not dishonoured again, the matter has been adjourned
to 05.07.2023 on which date there is possibility of disposal of the said complaint
in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties. On the strength of the
aforesaid assertion, quashing of order dated 25.01.2023 passed by Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Panchkula as well as FIR No.71 dated 13.02.2023
registered under Section 174-A of IPC at Police Station Sector-7 has been sought
for.
Notice of motion.
On advance notice, Mr. G.S. Chinna, A.A.G. Haryana, who is present
in the Court accepts notice on behalf of the State and does not controvert the
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081372
CRM-M-29317-2023 2023:PHHC:081372 -2-
factual aspect as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that
matter has been compromised.
Heard.
From the record, it is apparent that the present FIR in question has
been registered on account of the petitioner having been declared as proclaimed
person vide order dated 25.01.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Panchkula, in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Act of 1881, which were
instituted in pursuance of the complaint filed by Abhishek Gupta Karta of HUF
Subhash Gupta and sons. However, as per submissions made by the counsel for
the petitioner the matter has been settled between the parties and the complaint in
question would be withdrawn.
A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-43813-2018 titled as
"Baldev Chand Bansal v. State of Haryana and another" decided on
29.01.2019 has quashed the FIR under Section 174-A IPC holding 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
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 process of
law.
xxx xxx xxx
In views of the same, I find merit in the present petition and accordingly,
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081372
CRM-M-29317-2023 2023:PHHC:081372 -3-
present petition is allowed and the impurnged order dated 24.10.2016
passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Panchkula as well as FIR No.64
dated 05.02.2017 registered under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code
at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula and all other subsequent
proceedings arising thereof, are hereby quashed."
A perusal of the above judgment would show that in a similar case
where the FIR had been registered under Section 174-A of the IPC in proceedings
under Section 138 of the Act of 1881, while declaring the petitioner therein as
proclaimed offender, this High Court having relied upon after relying upon
various judgments, observed that once the main petition under Section 138 of the
Act of 1881 stands withdrawn in view of an amicable settlement between the
parties, the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A of the IPC is nothing
but an abuse of the process of law. The said aspect was one of the main
consdieration for allowing the petition and setting aside the order declaring the
petitioner therein as proclaimed person as well as quashing of the FIR under
Section 174-A of the IPC.
In another case titled as Ashok Madan vs. State of Haryana and
another" reported as 2020 (4) RCR (Criminal) 87 also it has been held as under:
"No doubt, the learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently argued
that the offence under Section 174A IPC is independent of the main case,
therefore, merely because the main case has been dismissed for want of
prosecution, the present petition cannot be allowed, however, keeping in
view the fact that the present FIR was registered only on account of the
absence from the proceedings in the main case which had been
subsequently regularized by the Court while granting bail to the petitioner,
the default stood condoned. In such circumstances, continuation of
proceedings under Section 174A IPC shall be abuse of the process of
Court.
7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.446 dated 21.08.2017,
registered under Section 174A IPC at Police Station Kotwali, District
Faridabad, as well as consequential proceedings shall stand quashed."
Recently in another case in CRM-M-52319-2021 as well on
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081372
CRM-M-29317-2023 2023:PHHC:081372 -4-
15.12.2021 titled as Sharvan Kumar Singh @ Sarvan Singh versus State of
Haryana our High Court quashed the proceedings under Section 174-A IPC on
the ground that in the main complaint under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 were
withdrawn after a compromise between the parties.
In the instant case in fact the parties have settled the dispute amicable
involved in the complaint. The case in hand stands at much better footing where
actually the dispute has been brought to an end and the parties are at peace. The
continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC will not only spark the
dispute already resolved but will also consume the precious time of the Courts of
law in dealing with the proceedings unwarrantedly. This Court deems and is of the
considered opinion that the utmost endeavour shall be to bring an end to the
dispute wherein it seems that ends of justice can be met rather than continuing the
proceedings rather than mere technicalities despite the fact that the issue involved
in the main complaint has finally come to an end.
In view of the discussion as recorded hereinabove and the case law
adjudicated upon the identical issue in the aforesaid judgments, further
proceedings in the FIR in question would only amount to be an abuse of the
process of law. Accordingly, order dated 25.01.2023 passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Panchkula as well as FIR No.70 dated 12.02.2023, under
Section 174-A IPC registered at Police Station Sector-7, Panchkula, District
Panchkula and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby
quashed.
The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
02.06.2023 JUDGE
rajeev
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:081372
4 of 4
