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

Vishal vs State Of Haryana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 7553 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 7553 P&H
Judgement Date : 9 April, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Vishal vs State Of Haryana And Another on 9 April, 2024

                                         Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048116
                                                                                 1

CRM-M No.17622 of 2024                                  2024:PHHC:048116

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

126

                                   CRM-M No.17622 of 2024
                                   Date of Decision: 09.04.2024

VISHAL                                                  ......Petitioner

            Vs

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER                            ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

Present:    Ms. Veena Hooda, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

                     ****

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

[1]. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., prayer has

been made for quashing of FIR No.474 dated 01.06.2022 registered under Section

174-A, IPC at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal (Annexure P-3) along with

consequential proceedings arising out of the said FIR.

[2]. The FIR in question was registered against the petitioner in terms of

order dated 22.03.2022 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Assandh,

whereby he was declared as a proclaimed person in a complaint filed under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as 'N.I.

Act') against him.

[3]. Briefly stating, being implicated in the complaint under Section 138

of the aforesaid N.I. Act bearing NACT No.298 of 2019, petitioner was summoned

therein; on account of his non-appearance, he was declared as proclaimed person

vide order dated 22.03.2022 followed by registration of FIR under Section 174-A

IPC against him.





                                        1 of 3

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048116


CRM-M No.17622 of 2024                                2024:PHHC:048116

[4].         Impugning the aforesaid, learned counsel for the petitioner submits

that parties to the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, have entered into a

settlement upon payment of dues at the instance of petitioner and the complaint

now stands withdrawn vide order dated 09.03.2024 passed by the National Lok

Adalat, Assandh (Annexure P-4).

[4]. Learned counsel further submits that once the main proceedings under

Section 138 of the N.I. Act have already come to an end, no useful purpose is

going to be served by continuing with the proceedings arising out of the FIR in

question. In support, she relies upon judgments of this Court, passed in CRM-M

No.16449 of 2018 titled as "Satish Kumar vs. State of Haryana and another"

and CRM-M No.30911 of 2021, titled as "Ram Kumar Rana vs. State of

Haryana and another".

[5]. Notice of motion to respondent No.1 only at this stage. No notice is

required to be served upon respondent No.2/complainant as the matter already

stands settled between petitioner and respondent No.2; which may even otherwise

burden respondent No.2 towards unnecessary litigation expenses.

[6]. Upon advance notice, Mr. Chetan Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana accepts

notice on behalf of the respondent/State and opposes the prayer made on behalf of

petitioner while submitting that he was having knowledge of pendency of

proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act as well as summoning order, but he

deliberately chose not to appear before the Trial Court resulting into his declaration

as proclaimed person followed by registration of FIR against him, thus the

impugned FIR warrants no interference.





                                      2 of 3

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:048116


CRM-M No.17622 of 2024                                2024:PHHC:048116

[7].         I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the

paper book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.

[8]. Once, the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, already stands

withdrawn by complainant on having received the entire cheque amount in dispute,

no useful purpose is going to be served by carrying on with the proceedings arising

out of the present FIR. Even otherwise, the case of petitioner is fully covered with

the judgments passed by this Court in Satish Kumar and Ram Kumar Rana's

cases (supra).

[9]. In view of discussion made hereinabove, the present petition is

allowed and the FIR No.474 dated 01.06.2022 registered under Section 174-A, IPC

at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal along with consequential proceedings

arising out of the said FIR is quashed qua the petitioner.

[10] The aforesaid order, however would be subject to deposit of cost(s) of

Rs.2000/- by the petitioner with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Clerks

Association, Chandigarh within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this order.



                                               (HARKESH MANUJA)
April 09, 2024                                     JUDGE
Atik
             Whether speaking/reasoned         Yes/No
             Whether reportable                Yes/No




                                      3 of 3

 

 
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