Atul Rajput vs State Of Haryana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 9957 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Atul Rajput vs State Of Haryana And Another on 8 May, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064418
                                                                                 1



CRM-M
    M No.23994 of 2022

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH

271

                                CRM-M M No.23994 of 2022
                                Date of Decision: 08.05.2024

ATUL RAJPUT                                          ......Petitioner
         Vs
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER                         ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ
                                   MANUJA

Present:    Mr. Arnav Kumar,
                        Kumar Advocate
            for the petitioner.

        Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Asstt. A.G., Haryana.
             ****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

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

made for quashing of order dated 20.07.2017 (Annexure P-3)) passed by the

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala, Ambala, whereby the petitioner was declared as

proclaimed person in the proceedings arising out of case bearing COMA No.2031

of 2016 dated 20.10.2016 followed by registration of FIR No. No.315 dated 05.09.2017

registered under Section 174-A 174 A IPC at Police Station Ambala Cantt., Haryana.

[2]. Briefly stating, the petitioner was summoned in a complaint filed

under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be

referred as 'the N.I. Act') at the instance of the complainant. On account of non-

non

appearance of petitioner, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were ordered

against him and as a consequence thereof, he was declared as proclaimed person

vide order dated 20.07.2017 followed by registration of FIR No. No.315 dated

05.09.2017 under Section 174-A 174 IPC against him him.

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064418

CRM-M

[3]. Impugning the aforementioned order and FIR, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that petitioner was never served with the process of Court as he

was not residing on the address mentioned in the complaint complaint/notice /notice at the relevant

time and as such he could not appear before the Trial Court. He further points out

that later, ater, a settlement came to be arrived at between the parties as petitioner

discharged his liability by paying the entire cheque amount in favour of

complainant and in pursuance thereof, the complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. N.I

Act, was withdrawn by complainant and complaint file was ordered to be

consigned to record room, vide order dated 12.06.2018 passed by the Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Ambala. Moreover, the petitioner also volunteers to provide

two patient stretchers-cum-trolley stretchers trolley with mattress and one wheelchair to the Sub-

Sub

Divisional Civil Hospital, Ambala Cantt, Haryana so as further the public cause.

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

Section 138 of the N.I. Act 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, he relies upon judgments of this Court, passed in CRM-M CRM

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

another

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

Haryana and another".

[5]. On the other hand, learned State counsel 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 FI FIR against him.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:064418

CRM-M

[6]. 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.

[7]. Once, the complaint under Section 138 of the 1881 Act, already

stands withdrawn wn 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). Moreover, the petitioner has already been admitted to

bail vide order dated 12.09.2017 passed by the Trial Court.

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

allowed, however subject to providing two patient stretchers stretchers-cum-trolley trolley with

mattress and one wheelchair to the Sub-Divisional Sub Divisional Civil Hospital, Ambala Cantt,

Haryana, within a period of three weeks from today as volunteered by the

petitioner against due receipt, receipt issued by the concerned Civil Surgeon. A copy of

the receipt shall also placed before the concerned Trial Court. Accordingly,, the

impugned order dated 20.07.2017 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

Ambala declaring petitioner as proclaimed person is sset aside and as a consequence

thereof, the resultant FIR No.315 315 dated 05.09.2017 registered under Section 174-A

IPC at Police Station Ambala Cantt. Haryana, along with all consequential

proceedings arising therefrom is also quashed.

                                              (HARKESH MANUJA)
May 08, 2024                                      JUDGE
Atik
             Whether speaking/reasoned        Yes/No
             Whether reportable               Yes/No




                                     3 of 3