Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vijay Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 25 April, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:056788
2024:PHHC:056788
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-55074-2018
DECIDED ON: 25.04.2024
VIJAY KUMAR AND ANOTHER PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. G.S. Brar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Punjab
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking
quashing of FIR No.178 dated 19.12.2017, registered at Police Station
Division No.6, District Jalandhar under Section 174-A of IPC (Annexure P-
9) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present FIR
came to be registered in pursuance of the criminal complaint bearing No.
NACT/1783/15 dated 13.07.2015, filed against petitioner No.1 under section
138 of Negotiable Instrument Act wherein cheque no. 212595 dated
28.02.2015 for a sum of Rs. 80,000/- issued by petitioner No.1 got
dishonored.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in another
complaint bearing No. 371/15 dated 09.02.2015, filed against petitioner
No.2 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act wherein cheque no.
000006 dated 30.11.2014 for a sum of Rs. 80,000/- issued by petitioner
No.2 got dishonored. He also submits that the petitioners were neither
served properly nor refused to receive summons and as such the petitioners
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:056788
-2- 2024:PHHC:056788
CRM-M-55074-2018
were totally unaware about the present complaint and thus due to their non
appearance in the said complaints they have been declared proclaimed
persons vide orders dated 25.04.2016 and 23.02.2016
respectively(Annexures P3 and P4).
4. He further states that petitioner No.2 has also filed separate
petition bearing CRM-M-55020-2018 before this Court, seeking to quash the
order dated 23.02.2016 passed by learned JMIC, Jalandhar, whereby he was
declared proclaimed offender, in Crl. Complaint No. 371/2015 dated
9.2.2015 registered under Section 138 NI Act.
5. Heard, learned counsel for the parties.
6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the
petitioners that the main complaint stands withdrawn by the complainant on
16.11.2023, copy whereof has been produced by learned counsel for the
petitioners today in the Court and the same is taken on record,therefore,
continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC would be abuse of
process of law. Also, this principle has been laid down in several dictums of
this Court and reliance can be placed upon the orders dated 20.07.2022 and
24.08.2022 respectively, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in
CRM-M-46062-2017, titled as "Jatin Dhawan and another versus State of
Haryana and another" and CRM-M-12534-2022, titled as "Krishan
Kumar versus State of Haryana and another", respectively wherein it has
been held that once the main case is dismissed as withdrawn, the
continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC shall be an abuse of
process of law.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:056788
-3- 2024:PHHC:056788
CRM-M-55074-2018
7. Further reliance can be placed upon the orders of this Court
dated 12.12.2022 and 13.12.2022 passed in CRM-M-55634-2022 titled as
"Jinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another" and CRM-M-45051-2022
titled as "Hari Singh Meena Vs. State of Haryana", respectively in this
regard.
8. 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 174-A I.P.C. Shall
be abuse of the process of court.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.446 dated
21.08.2017, registered under Section 174-A I.P.C. At Police
Station Kotwali, District Faridabad, as well as consequential
proceedings shall stand quashed."
9. 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 that the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A of the
IPC shall be an abuse of the process of court.
10. Since the main complaint has been dismissed as withdrawn, as
is evident from the perusal of aforesaid order dated 16.11.2023 passed by
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class-13, and the offence between the petitioners and
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:056788
-4- 2024:PHHC:056788
CRM-M-55074-2018
complainant is personal in nature not against the society at large, who have
resolved their dispute, no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the
proceedings in the instant case.
11. Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances, the
present petition is allowed and FIR No.178 dated 19.12.2017, registered at
Police Station Division No.6, District Jalandhar under Section 174-A of IPC
(Annexure P-9) alongwith orders dated 25.04.2016 and 23.02.2016
respectively (Annexures P3 and P4) and all consequential proceedings
arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
25.04.2024 JUDGE
dinesh
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable No
4 of 4
