ASHOK MADAN Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was an accused in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('the Act of 1881' for short).

(2.) The petitioner filed a petition for quashing of the complaint and summoning order in this Court. Personal appearance of the petitioner was exempted and he was permitted to put in appearance through his counsel. The petitioner claims that he complied with the same. However, thereafter, proceedings under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short) were initiated against the petitioner, when on application for cancellation of warrants of arrest was moved by the petitioner, the Court allowed bail to him. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the court. Once again, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. to declare the petitioner proclaimed person were initiated as the petitioner was subsequently also found absent on 14.09.2019, which resulted into FIR No.446 dated 21.08.2017 under Section 174 A of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) It is not in dispute that thereafter the petitioner appeared before the learned trial court and once again granted bail, as pleaded, correctness whereof is not disputed. The main complaint has been dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 06.05.2018. It is not further in dispute that no application for restoration of the main complaint under Section 138 of the Act of 1881 has been filed, although more than a year has elapsed.