Jarnail Singh Bajwa vs State Of Punjab
2024 Latest Caselaw 18725 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jarnail Singh Bajwa vs State Of Punjab on 22 October, 2024

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955




CRM M-45812 of 2024                                             1




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                  AT CHANDIGARH

                            CRM M- 45812 of 2024
                            Date of Decision: 22.10.2024

Jarnail Singh Bajwa                                             ...Petitioner
                                   Versus
State of Punjab                                            ... Respondents


CORAM :       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SHEKHAWAT

Present :    Mr. Nikhil Ghai, Advocate with
             Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. M.S. Bajwa, DAG, Punjab.

N.S.SHEKHAWAT, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section

528 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to quash the FIR No. 0064 dated

24.02.2021 under Section 174-A IPC, registered at Police Station City

Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali (Annexure P-1) alongwith all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Dayal

Singh complainant had filed a complaint case, i.e., NACT/246/2018

under Sections 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881

(hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act') against the present petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the complainant had

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955

entered into an agreement with the petitioner to sell a property but

despite making payment, the property was not given to him and upon

filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Act by the complainant,

the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed offender and one FIR

No. 0064 dated 24.02.2021 under Section 174-A Police Station City

Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Annexure P-1) was registered against the

present petitioner. After the registration of the FIR, with the

intervention of the respectables, the petitioner and complainant have

settled the matter and complainant suffered a statement before the

trial Court that they have compromised the matter. Accordingly, the

complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn by the trial

Court vide order dated 21.01.2022 (Annexure P-2). Learned counsel

for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was declared to be a

proclaimed offender, only to secure his presence before the trial

Court. However, since the petitioner has compromised the matter with

the complainant and the complaint has already been withdrawn by the

complainant, no purpose will be served by prosecuting the petitioner

under Section 174-A IPC and the FIR and all subsequent proceedings

arising therefrom are liable to be quashed by this Court.

3. 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:-

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955

"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 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."

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955

4. 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 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.

5. 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

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955

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."

6. In the present case also, the main case has already been

withdrawn by the complainant. Consequently, the continuation of the

proceedings arising out order dated 30.11.2019 and the FIR No. 0064

dated 24.02.2021 under Section 174-A, Police Station City Kharar

District SAS Nagar (Annexure P-1) would be an abuse of process of

the Court. Similar observations have been made by this Court in the

matter of "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".

7. Even otherwise, as per provisions of Section 82 of the

Cr.P.C., the petitioner could at the worst be declared as proclaimed

person and not proclaimed offender and in view of this fact also, the

order dated 30.11.2019 and the FIR are liable to be quashed.

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:141955

8. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and

the order dated 30.11.2019 and FIR No. 0064 dated 24.02.2021 under

Section 174-A IPC, registered at Police Station City Kharar, District

SAS Nagar, Mohali (Annexure P-1) alongwith all consequential

proceedings arising therefrom are hereby ordered to be quashed.

22.10.2024                                 (N.S.SHEKHAWAT)
amit rana                                          JUDGE

             Whether reasoned/speaking :             Yes/No
             Whether reportable         :            Yes/No




                                  6 of 6