Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tehal Singh vs State Of Punjab on 13 March, 2023
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
CRM-M-40305-2021 (O&M) -1- 204 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-40305-2021 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 13% MARCH, 2023 TEHAL SINGH eves PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB esse RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL. Present: Mr. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab. 36 2 2 SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
The instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 13, dated 22.02.2020 (Annexure P-2), under Section 174-A IPC, Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran.
Brief facts of the case are that respondent No.2 filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner on account of dishonouring of a cheque.
During the pendency of the said complaint the petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender vide order dated 21.11.2019 (Annexure P-
1) and a direction was issued to the concerned Station House Officer to register FIR under Section 174-A IPC.
In pursuance to the said order, the impugned FIR No.13, dated 22.02.2020 (Annexure P-2) was registered against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the file was 3003.03.16 16:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-40305-2021 (O&M) -2- taken up in the National Lok Adalat held on 10.04.2021 and Mr. K.M. Gupta, Advocate for the complainant had suffered a statement that the compromise has already been effected between the parties qua the cheque in question, thereofre, the complainant does not want to proceed further with the proceedings and the present complaint was dismissed as withdrawn. He submits that in view of the withdrawal of main complaint case, the order dated 21.11.2019 declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender along-with FIR No. 13, dated 22.02.2020 (Annexure P-2), under Section 174-A IPC, Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran is liable be quashed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the orders dated 20.07.2022 and 24.08.2022 respectively, passed by a co- ordinate 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"Krishan Kumar versus State of Haryana and another", wherein it has been held that once the main case is dismissed as withdrawn, the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC shall be an abuse of process of law.
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 SHAM SUNDER 2023.03.16 10:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-40305-2021 (O&M) -3- 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.
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."
A perusal of the relevant extract of the above judgment clearly shows 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.
In the present case the complaint under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 has been dismissed as withdrawn. Once the impugned complaint has been dismissed as withdrawn and all the accused stand acquitted, then the continuance of the prosecution in the FIR lodged under Section 174-A of IPC would be an abuse of the process of Court.
Keeping in view the above-said facts and circumstances, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 13, dated 22.02.2020 (Annexure P-
2), under Section 174-A IPC, Police Station Valtoha, District Tarn Taran with all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL) 13" MARCH, 2023 JUDGE sham Whether speaking/reasoned _ Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No SHAM SUNDER 2023.03.16 10:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document