Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

Continuation of Proceedings Under Section 174-A IPC An Abuse of the Process of Law : High Court Quashes FIR

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has underscored the importance of judicial prudence and fairness. The court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, quashed an FIR, emphasizing that the "continuation of proceedings under Section 174-A IPC shall be an abuse of the process of court."

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"]

Latest Legal News