CRM-M-7354-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 131 CRM-M-7354-2026 Date of decision: 22.07.2026 NAGENDRA J SHARMA .... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER ….RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI Present: Mr. Punit Malik, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Kanwar Sanjiv Kumar, Asstt. A.G., Haryana. **** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) This is a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of the FIR No.1390 dated 25.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A IPC at Police Station Shivaji Nagar, District Gurugram which was registered consequent to the order 12.07.2019 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gurugram declaring the petitioner as proclaimed person in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The brief facts of the case are that, in discharge of his legal liability, the petitioner/accused opted for the Electronic Clearing System (ECS) facility from his account maintained with Standard Chartered Bank, bearing MICR No. ₹ 440036002, for the monthly debit of a sum of 57,371/- towards the instalments payable in respect of the aforesaid loan transaction. The said amount was to be debited from the petitioner/accused Bank Account No. 80410054133 and correspondingly credited to the account of respondent No. 2. However, the ECS was declined with the return memo dated 14.10.2016 with the remarks ‘04- Balance Insufficient’. Thereafter, as the petitioner/accused failed to make payment, JITESH LAL 2026.07.22 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7354-2026 2 a complaint under Section 25 of Payment and Settlement System Act, 2007 came to be instituted against the petitioner/accused and he was summoned to face trial. Subsequently, he was declared a proclaimed person vide order dated 12.07.2019 (Annexure P-3). Thereafter, a compromise was effected between the parties and the complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn in terms of the order dated 14.12.2019 (Annexure P-4). In view of the dismissal of the complaint under 25 of Payment and Settlement System Act, 2007 on the basis of the compromise, the present petition for quashing of aforesaid FIR No.1390 dated 25.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) under Section 174-A IPC Police Station Shivaji Nagar, District Gurugram came to be registered. The learned counsel for the petitioner/accused submits that he had wrongly been declared a proclaimed person and on learning about the same, the petitioner compromised the matter with the complainant. Thereafter, on 12.07.2019, the counsel for complainant in the Trial Court got recorded his statement that as per his instructions, the complainant did not want to proceed further with the present complaint and wanted to withdraw the same. Based on the said statement, the complaint was ordered to be dismissed as withdrawn on 12.07.2019 (Annexure P-4). The learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and has submitted that the FIR has been correctly registered. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paper-book. From the above-said facts and circumstances, it is apparent that the present FIR was registered in view of the fact that the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed person in the proceeding under the Section 25 of Payment and Settlement System Act, 2007. The impugned complaint itself has been withdrawn. JITESH LAL 2026.07.22 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7354-2026 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:- “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- JITESH LAL 2026.07.22 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7354-2026 4 A of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sector-5, Panchkula and all other subsequent proceedings arising thereof, are hereby quashed.” 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. 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 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 JITESH LAL 2026.07.22 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7354-2026 5 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 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 IPC shall be an abuse of the process of court. A similar view has been expressed by this Court in “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”. In the present case the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act have culminated in a settlement with the withdrawal of the complaint. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and subject to a deposit of Rs.25,000/- as costs with the Sadhna Society for the Mentally Handicapped, Near Housing Board Chowk, Raen Basera Building, Manimajra, Sector-13, Chandigarh, the FIR No.1390 dated 25.07.2019 (Annexure P-1) registered under Section 174-A IPC at Police Station Shivaji Nagar, District Gurugram along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. (JASJIT SINGH BEDI) 22.07.2026 JUDGE JITESH Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No JITESH LAL 2026.07.22 14:07 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document