-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
The case revolved around petitioner Ravi Kant, who sought the quashing of FIR No. 2387 dated 12.12.2019, registered under Section 174-A of IPC, 1860. The FIR was a consequence of the petitioner being declared a proclaimed person in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, related to a dishonored cheque.
Highlighting the pursuit of justice, the court observed, "In the present case the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act have culminated in a settlement with the withdrawal of the complaint." The petitioner had reached a compromise with the complainant, leading to the dismissal of the initial complaint.
The court referred to similar precedents, such as "Baldev Chand Bansal vs. State of Haryana" and "Ashok Madan vs. State of Haryana", where FIRs under Section 174-A IPC were quashed following settlements in the main petitions under Section 138 of the Act.
In its concluding remarks, the court allowed the petition, stating that the FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising from it are "hereby quashed." This decision underscores the court's commitment to ensuring that legal proceedings are not misused and justice is served in a fair and timely manner.
Date of Decision: 13 October 2023
RAVI KANT VS STATE OF HARYANA
[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/PH-13-OCT-2023-Ravi_Kant_vs_State_Of_Haryana.pdf"]
