Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gupreet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 4 March, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038957
CRM-M-11575-2024 -1-
140 2024:PHHC:038957
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-11575-2024
DECIDED ON: 04.03.2024
GURPREET SINGH
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Harpal Singh Sidhu, Advocate
for the petitioner.
*****
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of the order
dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure P-2), passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn
Taran vide which the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender in
Complaint case No.NACT/41/2018, dated 17.01.2018 titled as "Indusind Bank
versus Gurpreet Singh" under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and
further to quash FIR No.244, dated 24.08.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar
Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran, under Section 174-A of IPC (Annexure P-3).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the main complaint
NACT/41/2018, dated 17.01.2018, under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments
Act, stands withdrawn by the complainant, in view of the compromise affected
between the parties vide order dated 18.05.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed by Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran.
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038957
3. He further submits that on 10.01.2019, the proceedings in complaint
case No. NACT/41/2018 were fixed for presence of the present petitioner, wherein
the petitioner remained absent, therefore, the Iearned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Tarn Taran declared the petitioner as Proclaimed Person and sent the copy of the
order to SHO of the concerned Police Station for registration of FIR under section
174-A IPC. A copy of the order dated 10.01.2019 passed in NACT/41/2018 is
annexed as (Annexure P-2).
4. Notice of motion.
5. Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of
respondent/State and admits the factum of compromise.
6. Heard, learned counsel for respective parties.
7. Since the main complaint has been dismissed as withdrawn, as is
evident from the perusal of aforesaid order dated 18.05.2023 (Annexure P-4) passed
by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran and the offence between the
petitioner and 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 FIR No.244, dated 24.08.2019, registered at Police
Station Sadar Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran, under Section 174-A of IPC
(Annexure P-3).
8. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner
that the main complaint stands withdrawn by the complainant on 18.05.2023,
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
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038957
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.
9. 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.
10. 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 174-A 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."
11. 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.
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:038957
12. Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances, the present
petition is allowed. The order dated 10.01.2019 (Annexure P-2) and FIR No.244,
dated 24.08.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran,
under Section 174-A of IPC (Annexure P-3) alongwith all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
04.03.2024 JUDGE
Poonam Negi
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
