9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P-2) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar vide which the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed person. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, Prhlad Singh Saini @ Prhlad Singh had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act of 1881") for dishonour of cheque dated 09.05.2017 amounting to Rs. 6,00,000/- drawn on Punjab National Bank, G.J.U., Hisar. It is further submitted that in the said proceedings, the petitioner was never served and was illegally declared as proclaimed person vide order dated 04.07.2019 (Annexure P-2) and on the same date, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar had directed for registration of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er:- "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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 174-A of the 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, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .04.2021 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Exclusive Court, NI Act, Hisar. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced here as under:- "Present: Complainant in person with Sh. D.V. Soni, Advocate. Original file received from record room on the application, which was moved by learned counsel for the complainant. Ahlmad is directed to restore the case at its original number. Complainant duly identified by his counsel has made a statement that he has compromised the matter with the accused, therefore, he wants to withdraw the same. Heard. In view of the statement made by complainant duly identified by his counsel, the present complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to record ro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
