High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/12653/2026allowed

Karan Chopra v. State Of Punjab And Another

2026-05-11Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel9 pages

!"#$%$ &'( (

)* "" &'( (

' +, ( -- ,

# $ %%%%% - ,.(/ 0 *1 & '

(

)$*+# $,$-. ((.

/ "It is respectfully prayed that in the facts and circumstances of the case the petition may kindly be allowed and the impugned order dated 03.01.2022 (Annexure P"3) passed in complaint case bearing NACT"3308 of 2018, CNR No.PBAS030075602018, under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the Ld. Trial Court vide which the petitioner has been declared proclaimed Person and FIR No.0058 dated 03.03.2022, under section 174"A of IPC 1860, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar (Annexure P"4) along with all other proceedings emanating thereof, may kindly be quashed in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, in the interest of Justice." $ ' 0 123

4 5 "12. First Information contents (Attach separate sheet, if necessary):

In the Court of Amanpreet Kaur Judicial Magistrate"1 Class Next Date, Purpose of case Orders and Judgments as well as other CASE INFORMATION IS AVALLABLE ON http://ecourts.gov.in Intimation regarding Proclaimed Person NACT/3308/2018 JAGDISH ARORA S/O RAM NARAIN R/0 362, GREEN AVENUE AMRITSAR VERSUS KARAN CHOPRA S/O RANDHIR CHOPRA R/O 101/4, GALI NO.4, GOPAL NAGAR, MAJITHA ROAD AMRITSAR Under Section:138 Ν.Ι. Act Police Station: CIVIL LINES To, The SHO, Police Station CIVIL LINES In the above noted case the accused KARAN CHOPRA S/O RANDHIR CHOPRA R/O 101/4, GALI NO.4, GOPAL NAGAR, MAJITHA ROAD AMRITSAR declared proclaimed person by this court vide order dated 03.01.2022 you are hereby directed to enter his name in relevant register and take action under section 174"A of IPC and produce the above said accused in this court as and when he is arrested in the above said case. (Amanpreet Kaur) Judicial Magistrate"1st Class Amritsar.

Today at the Police Station: At this time, upon receipt of the aforesaid order at the police station, a case under the aforesaid offence and sections has been registered and entered in the register, and a copy of the FIR along with the original order is being sent by post for further investigation to ASI Karanjeet Singh, 2582/ASR, In"charge, Choki Green Avenue, Amritsar. The SHO Sahib and the Control Room have been informed by telephone. Supplementary Rapat No. 34, Time 01:16 PM." - (

0 12 0( 0 ( (

3 4

&-*# ( 2 0

&**&

. ( (0 7 0 12 0

(

(0 0 (/ (( ( 0 / (.

0(0 (

&-*#2

&**&( /

. . (

0 0

( .(

qua 0 12 '

(

,8 && $,$9 / (

. "File taken up today on an application for putting up the file and withdraw the complaint. As original file pertaining to this complaint has been consigned to record room Amritsar as accused in the present case has been declared Proclaimed Person. Ahlmad is directed to summoned the original file from judicial record room Amritsar and put up this application along with original file. Original file summoned from record room. Complainant suffered a statement that matter has been compromised between the parties. He withdraw the present complaint and same may kindly be dismissed as withdrawn. In view of the statement suffered by the complainant, the present complaint stands dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to the record room, Amritsar after due compliance." :

0 ( (

( 0 ( 5 # $ 0 0 0

# $5 0 (

;

) 0((/ (

(

0 /

;

( ( (

5< = ' 0(;

0 12 3 (

&=95 2

; (0 >

? .(

0 $ *" %

, ,8 ,= $,$-?

. "3. In view the fact that after the principle proceedings in which the petitioner was declared Proclaimed Offender stand concluded, the question would arise is: 'whether in the given circumstances, proceedings under Section 174A of the IPC pursuant to FIR No.425 dated 17th of November, 2017 can be allowed to continue.

4. The question framed ibid is no more res integra and already stands answered by Co"ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM"M"43813"2018 titled as "Baldev Chand Bansal v. State of Haryana and another" vide order dated 29.01.2019, which held as under:

"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.64 dated 15.02.2017 filed under Section 174A 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."

XX XXX XXXX Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decisions rendered by this Court in "Vikas Sharma v. Gurpreet Singh Kohli and another (supra), 2017, (3) L.A.R.584, Microqual Techno Limited and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2015 (32) RCR (Criminal) 790 and "Rajneesh Khanna v. 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.

XX XXX XXXX 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 174A of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sector"5, Panchkula and all other subsequent proceedings arising thereof, are hereby quashed."

5. Same is the view of another Co"ordinate Bench in the "Ashok Madaan v. State of Haryana and another" reported as 2020 (4) RCR (Criminal) 87, wherein it has been held that:

"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 LP.C. shall be abuse of the process of court.

7. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 446 dated 21.08.2017, registered under Section 174A I.PC. at Police Station Kotwali, District Faridabad, as well as consequential proceedings shall stand quashed."

* &

(/ "@( 0

(# 9-)A $,$9 ,$ ,& $,$)? ( "7.3 Now, what happens if the status under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is nullified i.e., the person subjected to such proclamation, by virtue of subsequent developments is no longer required to be presented before a Court of law. Then, can the prosecution still proceed against such a person for having not appeared before a Court during the time that the process was in effect. The answer is in the affirmative. We say so for the following reasons:" (i) The language of Section 174A, IPC says "whoever fails to appear at the specified place and the specified time as required by proclamation...". This implies that the very instance at which a person is directed to appear, and he does not do so, this Section comes into play;

(ii) What further flows from the language employed is that the instance of non"appearance becomes an infraction of the Section, and therefore, prosecution therefor would be independent of Section 82, Cr.P.C. being in effect;

(iii) So, while proceedings under Section 174A IPC cannot be initiated independent of Section 82, Cr.P.C., i.e., can only be started post the issuance of proclamation, they can continue if the said proclamation is no longer in effect.

(iv) We find that the Delhi High Court has taken this view, i.e., that Section 174A, IPC is a stand"alone offence in

!"!!

# $ %"!&' ( !"!&

# $ !)%*' + ,

+ %-." !"!%/ %.

/ !"!!For the reasons afore"stated, we agree with the findings made in these judgments/orders. At the same time, it stands clarified that we have not commented on the merits of the cases. (v) Granted that the offence prescribed in Section 174A IPC is indeed stand"alone, given that it arises out of an original offence in connection with which proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is initiated and in the said offence the accused stands, subsequently, acquitted, it would be permissible in law for the Court seized of the trial under such offence, to take note of such a development and treat the same as a ground to draw the proceedings to a close, should such a prayer be made and the circumstances of the case so warrant. 8.

In conclusion, we hold that Section 174A IPC is an independent, substantive offence, that can continue even if the proclamation under Section 82, Cr.P.C. is extinguished. It is a stand"alone offence. xxxxxxxxx"

"@( ; 0 123 4

&=95 2

inter alia, ( 00(0 (

&-*#2

&**&

. ./ ( "

.( >

( / .

)$*+# $,$-9*$

&A=-

( (/ (.

0 >

( 0 . (0 ( ' 6. 0 (/

00 nailed"to"the"ground ( ( .

> 2 0 .( 0

' /

&=95 2 . ( 0 "@(

0 3 4 ; ((/. 12

&=95 2

2 proprio vigore 0 (( ; (

0 0 0( 0 ( 12

0 0 ; . . (/ ".

0 0(0 ( 123

. 4

0 0

.( ( . ( ; 123(

0 04

&=95 2 ' 0

(

0(0 (

&-*#2

&**& . ( ( > (/ ( 0 (

( ((/ < (

0 0 .((

((. . ( 0 (

. . .( 0 ( (

(

&-*#2

&**& 2 .( 0

( ( / 0(

(

0/0

0 ( 0

( (.@ (

" 0 ( (

6..

; ( ( ' 6.@(

( 0/ (5.( 0 ( > (/ (

(/ 0 (

(

(0 (

&, '

)$*+# $,$-

9*$

&A=- 0(/0

(

' .

((/ ( 0 0

" 0/

; 0(

.( 5

0 ' .

" .

. (

. >

.( ( (( ( ( (/

2 .? .

34 "

/ ( 5(

C .

34 " .(

0 (<

' .

. . ( 0 (

' .

. " .

. .

34 0 /

(. (( 0/

/0 .

( 0< 0 ( (/ . (

. " . > ( 0 (

34 (. .

> (/ / (.

( .

(. ' ( / .

34 /? 0( / ( / " ? (

((( ( 0

. (.

( (/

0 2 .?

)$*+# $,$- (

( .

." 0/.

; ( (

> nay (

0 ? ((/ (

&-*# ( 2 0

&**& ( ((

/ $,&*

(

0(/

0(0 (

&-*# ( 2 0

&**&

. .

0 0 ?

0 12(((

0 0

; &$

34 ' 0

,- ,& $,$$3 > 5-4 0 ( # '5--,* $,&* (

&-* # ( 2 0

&**& / ( ( .

( (0 12 # ,,)*

,- ,- $,$$

&=95 2 &*8,

( (6 D ( 00

0 3 > 594( . ((

0 ; 34

(( ( 34 / /- ,1 /&& $,$8 Naveen C

< C

(