Punjab-Haryana High Court
Subhash Chander vs State Of Haryana on 8 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047840
CRM-M-16846 of 2024 1 2024:PHHC:047840
145
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-16846 of 2024
Date of Decision: 08.04.2024
SUBHASH CHANDER
... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA
... Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY.
Present:- Mr. Anand Kumar Maurya, Advocate for
Mr. Amit Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Surender Singh, AAG, Haryana.
*****
SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition has been preferred by the petitioner under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for seeking quashing of the
order dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, District Sirsa in Complaint bearing No. NACT-486-
2022 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act whereby
petitioner was declared proclaimed person as well as FIR No. 0090 dated
20.01.2023 under Section 174-A IPC, Police Station Civil Line Sirsa,
District Sirsa (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom.
2. In nutshell, the brief facts of the case are that petitioner had
taken loan from HDFC Bank and on account of default of EMI's, the
complainant Bank filed complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047840
CRM-M-16846 of 2024 2 2024:PHHC:047840
Instrument bearing No. NACT/486/2022 dated 21.03.2022 titled as
"H.D.F.C Bank vs. Subhash Chander" against the petitioner and summons
were issued and petitioner failed to appear before the Court and vide order
dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2) petitioner was declared as proclaimed
person and FIR No.0090 dated 20.01.2023 under Section 174-A IPC was
registered, at Police Station Civil Line Sirsa, District Sirsa against the
present petitioner.
3. It is, inter alia contended by learned counsel for the petitioner
that the petitioner has deposited all the outstanding dues and the complainant
Bank has suffered statement that petitioner has deposited all the cheque
amount and the Bank does not want to continue with the complaint,
accordingly vide order dated 06.02.2024 the complaint has been dismissed
as withdrawn (Annexure P-3). He submits that since the complaint in
question has been withdrawn vide order dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-3)
the impugned order dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2) stands culminated and
continuation of the instant FIR on the basis of impugned order would be
abuse of process of law. He has referred to the judgments cited as Harbans
Singh vs. State of Haryana, and another, CRM-M-56596 of 2022, AIR
Online 2022 (P and H) 1035; Aditya Goyal vs. State of Haryana, CRM-
M-11269 of 2019: AIR Online 2019 (P and H) 2070; Lakhwinder Singh
vs. State of Punjab, CRM-M- 37155-2021; CRM-M-16528 of 2023,
Harnek Singh Vs. State of Haryana; CRM-M-52319-2021, Sharvan
Kumar Singh @ Sarvan Singh vs. State of Haryana; CRM-M-4344 of
2017, Anil Kumar vs. State of Punjab and another; to argue that since the
main complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047840
CRM-M-16846 of 2024 3 2024:PHHC:047840
has been withdrawn by the complainant on the basis of amicable settlement,
therefore, the present proceedings arising out of the FIR No.0090 dated
20.01.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Section 174-A IPC be quashed and
consequential proceedings arising therefrom be also set aside.
4. Learned State counsel has not disputed the factual matrix of the
case and admitted the withdrawal of complaint under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act, against the petitioner vide order dated
06.02.2024 (Annexure P-3).
5. I have heard the respective submission made by the learned
counsel for the parties.
6. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the record,
it is not disputed that a complaint was filed under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act against the petitioner and the present petitioner
was declared proclaimed person vide order dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2)
in the said complaint and on the basis thereof, the impugned FIR No.0090
dated 20.01.2023 (Annexure P-1) was registered against him. It is not
disputed that the aforesaid complaint has since been withdrawn by the
complainant vide order dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-3) on the basis of
amicable settlement between the parties. It has been held in the judgments
referred to above that when the main complaint in which the petitioner has
been declared proclaimed person have been withdrawn on the basis of
amicable settlement then continuation with the proceedings under Section
174-A IPC would be nothing but the abuse of the process of law.
7. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the
present case, without going into the controversy as to whether the petitioner
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:047840
CRM-M-16846 of 2024 4 2024:PHHC:047840
was aware of the proceedings going against him under the Negotiable
Instrument Act or not; the fact remains that the petitioner had been declared
as proclaimed person in the complaint referred to above vide order dated
05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2) and the complaint has already been dismissed as
withdrawn vide order dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-3), meaning thereby,
with the dismissal of the complaint the impugned order passed during the
course of proceedings of the complaint had already stood culminated,
therefore, the registration of the present FIR on the basis of above said order
declaring the petitioner as proclaimed person would not serve any purpose
and keeping the said FIR and consequent proceedings alive after the
dismissal of the complaint would not serve any purpose but would be abuse
of process of law.
8. Consequently, keeping in view the above said facts and
circumstances, the present petition is allowed, impugned FIR No.0090 dated
20.01.2023 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A IPC at Police
Station Civil Lines, Sirsa and order dated 05.01.2023 (Annexure P-2)
passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Sirsa in Criminal Complaint
NACT-486-2022 dated 21.03.2022 whereby petitioner was declared as
proclaimed person and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are
hereby set aside.
9. Petition stands allowed.
(SANJIV BERRY)
JUDGE
08.04.2024
Gyan i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes
ii) Whether reportable? Yes
4 of 4
