Allowed

Rajiv Mudgil v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC2 Sept 2024CRM-M/42717/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge order quashing an FIR registered under Section 174-A IPC for money laundering allegations. The court held that since the primary cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 NI Act was withdrawn, no justification exists for ancillary money laundering proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR and all consequential proceedings under Section 174-A IPC quashed; bail and surety bonds discharged; pending applications closed.

Rajiv Mudgil Vs State of Haryana — Public Procurement and Tenders | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

CRM-M No. 42717 of 2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

121 CRM-M No. 42717 of 2024 Decided on: 02.09.2024

¶5

Rajiv Mudgil ......Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana ......Respondents

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶7

Present: Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Vikrant Pamboo, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

¶9

¶10

ANOOP CHITKARA J.

¶11

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station		Sections
0030	06.01.2023	Shivaji Nagar, Gurugram	District	174-A IPC

¶12

Seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR registered pursuant to proclamation order dated 31.08.2022, passed by the JMIC, Gurugram (Annexure P-1) the accused has come up before this court under Section 528 BNSS.

¶13

After dishonor of cheque which petitioner had given to the complainant, the complainant had filed a complaint against the petitioner under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶14

The accused-petitioner could not be served through the ordinary process, including summons, bailable warrants, and even non-bailable warrants. The concerned court finally proceeded against the petitioner under section 82 of CrPC and declared the petitioner a proclaimed offender vide aforesaid order.

¶15

After issuance of proclamation, the matter got settled between the parties. Complaint stands dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.07.2024 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, pronounced in Daily Lok Adalat.

¶16

ANJU RANI 2024.09.06 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

¶17

CRM-M No. 42717 of 2024 2

¶18

The primary matter stands dismissed as withdrawn; there is no justification for continuing the ancillary proceedings under Section 174-A IPC. Consequently, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the petition is allowed. Above captioned FIR and all other consequential proceedings stands quashed qua the petitioner. Bail bonds and surety bonds, if any furnished, stand discharged. All pending applications, if any, stand closed.

¶19

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶20

02.09.2024 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No .

¶21

ANJU RANI 2024.09.06 17:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh

Rajiv Mudgil v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajiv Mudgil v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Karamjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Sukhdev Singh Alias Babbi Bhaleria Vs State of Punjab

Sanju and Another Vs State of Haryana and Others

Veena Rani Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sunita Rani Gupta and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others