Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

"Punjab-Haryana High Court Quashes FIR in Cheque Bounce Case, Citing 'Abuse of Process of Law'"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab-Haryana High Court has quashed an FIR in a cheque bounce case, emphasizing that continuing proceedings after the withdrawal of the main complaint amounts to an "abuse of the process of law."

The case, titled "Parvez Akhtar vs. State of Punjab & Anr.," involved a cheque for Rs. 18,000 issued by the petitioner, Mr. Parvez Akhtar, which was subsequently dishonored. This led to the initiation of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

However, the petitioner was declared a proclaimed person during the legal proceedings. Following this, a compromise was reached between the parties involved, resulting in the withdrawal of the complaint. The complainant expressed the desire to discontinue the case.

In his verdict, Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi referred to precedent cases and observed that once the main petition under Section 138 of the Act is withdrawn due to an amicable settlement, the continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC is tantamount to an "abuse of the process of law." This legal principle was upheld by the court.

The judgment, which is in line with earlier decisions, underlines the importance of ensuring that legal proceedings are not prolonged unnecessarily, especially when the main complaint has been withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties.

This ruling reaffirms the principle that legal processes should serve the interests of justice and not be used to harass or burden individuals once a resolution has been reached through compromise.

The decision, dated October 11, 2023, sets a precedent for cases involving similar circumstances in the Punjab-Haryana region, where the continuation of proceedings after the withdrawal of the main complaint will be carefully scrutinized to prevent any perceived abuse of the legal system.

Date of Decision: October 11, 2023

 Parvez Akhtar Vs State of Punjab & Anr.    

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Parvez_Akhtar_vs_State_Of_Punjab_And_Another_on_11_Ocr_2023.pdf"]

Latest Legal News