CRM-M-48772-2025 -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH 124 CRM-M-48772-2025 Date of Decision: 02.09.2025 Ranbir Singh ... Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA. Present: Mr. Sumit S. Bairagi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana. SUBHAS MEHLA , J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of FIR No.466 dated 02.06.2022, registered under Section 174-A IPC, at Police Station Indri, District Karnal (Annexure P-2) in compliance of the order dated 21.10.2023 (Annexure P-3), whereby, the petitioner has been declared proclaimed person in in Complaint NACT-46/2019 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1981 titled as ‘M/s Bharat Trading Co. Vs. Sh. Ranbri Singh’ and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise executed between the parties. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in fact, the matter had been compromised and the above said complaint had been withdrawn by respondent No.2 on 12.07.2025 (Annexure P-5). However, due to oversight and inadvertence, the order dated 17.01.2022, whereby, the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed person in the said complaint case, was not set aside which led to lodging of the above said FIR. MONIKA VERMA 2025.09.11 08:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh CRM-M-48772-2025 -2- 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Karan Veer Singh, Sr. DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court has consistently held that in case where an FIR under Section 174-A IPC has been registered in view of the order passed in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, while declaring the petitioner therein as proclaimed person, once the main complaint under Section 138 of the Act stands withdrawn in view of an amicable settlement between the parties, the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A of IPC would be nothing but an abuse of process of law. 6. To substantiate his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment passed by 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, wherein, it has been held as under:- “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 MONIKA VERMA 2025.09.11 08:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh CRM-M-48772-2025 -3- 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.” 7. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the following judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court:- (i). CRM-M-53195-2022 titled as “Nirmaljit Singh Vs. State of Haryana and others” reported as 2023 (244) AIC 676 (ii). CRM-M-59826-2022 titled as “Subhash Vs. State of Haryana and another, reported as 2023 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 722 (iii) CRM-M-47657-2022 titled as “Randhir Singh Tyagi Vs. State of Haryana and another”, reported as 2022 (3) DCR 694 8. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. 9. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances as well as the authorities of law referred to hereinabove, the present petition is squarely MONIKA VERMA 2025.09.11 08:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh CRM-M-48772-2025 -4- covered and, hence, allowed. Consequently, FIR No.466 dated 02.06.2022, registered under Section 174-A IPC, at Police Station Indri, District Karnal and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as cost, to be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services Authority concerned. 02.09.2025 ( SUBHAS MEHLA ) monika verma JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No MONIKA VERMA 2025.09.11 08:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment chandigarh