Tuesday, 02, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Atul Bansal vs State Of Haryana
2024 Latest Caselaw 7522 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 7522 P&H
Judgement Date : 9 April, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Atul Bansal vs State Of Haryana on 9 April, 2024

Author: Jasjit Singh Bedi

Bench: Jasjit Singh Bedi

                                                                                         2024:PHHC: 048600

                                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                                    CHANDIGARH
             287                                                    CRM-M-4546-2023
                                                              Date of decision: 09.04.2024

             ATUL BANSAL                                                             .... PETITIONER(S)
                                                                  VERSUS
             STATE OF HARYANA                                                       ....RESPONDENT(S)

             CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

             Present:                 Mr. S.S. Jattan, Advocate
                                      for the petitioner(s).

                       Mr. Rajiv Goel, DAG, Haryana.
                       ****
             JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral)

This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the

FIR No.328 dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A of

IPC, 1860 at Police Station Ambala City, District Ambala, which was registered

consequent to the order 30.10.2017 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Judicial

Magistrate, 1st Class, Ambala declaring the petitioner as proclaimed person in a

complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

The brief facts of the case are that in discharge of his legal liability,

the petitioner/accused issued a cheque No.025623 dated 10.07.2015 for an

amount of Rs.5,65,000/- in favour of 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 30.10.2017

(Annexure P-4).

Thereafter, a compromise was effected between the parties and the

complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the order dated

26.11.2022 (Annexure P-6). In view of the dismissal of the complaint under

authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD CRM-M-4546-2023 -2- 2024:PHHC: 048600

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act on the basis of the compromise, the

present petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR No.328 dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure

P-1) registered under Section 174-A at Police Station Ambala City, District

Ambala came to be registered.

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

26.11.2022, the counsel for 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

26.11.2022 (Annexure P-6).

The learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and has

submitted that the FIR has rightly been registered.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has

perused the paper-book.

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.

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

authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD CRM-M-4546-2023 -3- 2024:PHHC: 048600

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 dated 15.02.2017 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 IPC in view of the order

passed in proceedings under Section 138 of the Act, while declaring the petitioner

authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD CRM-M-4546-2023 -4- 2024:PHHC: 048600

therein as a proclaimed offender, a co-ordinate Bench after relying upon various

judgments observed that once the main petition under Section 138 of the Act

stands withdrawn in view of an amicable settlement between the parties, the

continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC is nothing but an abuse of

the process of law. The said aspect was one of the main considerations for

allowing the petition and setting aside the order declaring the petitioner therein as

a proclaimed person as well as quashing of the FIR under Section 174-A IPC.

Another co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a case titled as "Ashok

Madan vs. State of Haryana and another" reported as 2020(4) RCR (Criminal)

87 has also held as under:-

"No doubt, the learned counsel for the respondent has

vehemently argued that the offence under Section 174A I.P.C. 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 absence from the proceedings

in the main case which had been subsequently regularised by the

court while granting bail to the petitioner, the default stood

condoned. In such circumstances, continuation of proceedings under

Section 174A I.P.C. 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 I.P.C. At Police Station

Kotwali, District Faridabad, as well as consequential proceedings

shall stand quashed."

A perusal of the relevant extract of the above judgment would show

that where the main case was dismissed for want of prosecution, it was observed

authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD CRM-M-4546-2023 -5- 2024:PHHC: 048600

that the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC shall be an abuse of

the process of court. A similar view has been expressed by this Court in "Anil

Kumar Versus Jitender Kumar and another, CRM-M-5878-2022 decided on

06.04.2022", "Anil Kumar Versus Jitender Kumar and another, CRM-M-5755-

2022 decided on 06.04.2022" and "Varinder Kumar @ Virender Kumar Versus

State of Haryana and another, CRM-M-42551-2021 decided on 19.04.2022".

In the present case the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments

Act have culminated in a settlement with the withdrawal of the complaint.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and subject to a

deposit of Rs.20,000/- as costs with the Sadhana Society for the Mentally

Handicapped, Near Housing Board Chowk, Raen Basera Building, Manimajra,

Sector-13, Chandigarh, the FIR No.328 dated 17.02.2020 (Annexure P-1)

registered under Section 174-A of IPC, 1860 at Police Station Ambala City,

District Ambala along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are

hereby quashed.




                                                                         (JASJIT SINGH BEDI)
             09.04.2024                                                       JUDGE
             Kusum



                                      Whether speaking/reasoned           Yes/No
                                      Whether Reportable                  Yes/No







authenticity of this order/judgment
Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter