Dismissed¶¶30

Gyan Prakash Sarawgi v. State of Haryana and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC6 May 2025CRM-M/18367/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR on compromise ground refused where accused faces multiple other serious criminal cases; CRM-M-18367 of 2024, High Court of Punjab and Haryana, decided 06.05.2025, Mahabir Singh Sindhu J; Section 482 Cr.P.C.; FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022, PS Sector 37 Gurugram; Sections 406, 506, 120-B IPC; alleged cheating of Rs.1,24,55,594; compromise dated 20.03.2024; respondent No.2 consented; State objected citing four other pending cases (ECIR Case/1/2022 under PMLA Ss.65 & 19(3); Regular CBI/12019, CBI/8/2018, CBI/7/2018); JMFC Gurugram report dated 13.01.2025; petition dismissed; no expression of opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

None; the petition seeking quashing of FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022 and consequential proceedings was dismissed, and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed off. ¶¶30

Gyan Prakash Sarawgi Vs State of Haryana and Another — Money Laundering | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the petition seeking quashing of FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022 and consequential proceedings was dismissed, and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed off.

¶¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022 (P-1) under Sections 406, 506, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sector 37, Gurugram, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, deserves to be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of the compromise dated 20.03.2024 between the petitioner and respondent No.2.

¶¶20

Court's answer

Upon perusal of the Judicial Magistrate's report, it was quite evident that the petitioner is facing four other criminal cases of serious nature; therefore, prima facie, he has no respect for the rule of law.

¶¶28

Ratio / Principle

In view of the above, and particularly because the State opposed the quashing prayer, there was no option except to dismiss the petition, and it was ordered accordingly.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

The dismissal order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the allegations levelled in FIR No. 5 dated 04.01.2022 (P-1).obiter¶¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab & Haryana High Court (Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J.) dismissed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022 (Sections 406, 506, 120-B IPC, Police Station Sector 37, Gurugram) and all consequential proceedings, despite an amicable settlement evidenced by compromise dated 20.03.2024 (P-2) between petitioner Gyan Prakash Sarawgi and respondent No.2, whose counsel acknowledged the settlement. Learned State counsel opposed the prayer on the ground that the petitioner faces four other criminal cases of serious nature. Per the report dated 13.01.2025 of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram, the petitioner was neither absconding nor declared a Proclaimed Person/Offender, but four other criminal matters were pending against him: ECIR Case/1/2022 under Sections 65 & 19(3) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, and three CBI cases (Regular CBI/12019, CBI/8/2018, CBI/7/2018) under various IPC provisions including cheating and forgery. Holding that the petitioner, facing four other serious criminal cases, prima facie had no respect for the rule of law, and with the State opposing, the Court found no option except to dismiss the petition. The Court clarified that the order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the FIR allegations.

¶1

CRM-M-18367 of 2024 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

117

¶4

CRM-M-18367 of 2024 DATE OF DECISION :- 06.05.2025

¶5

Gyan Prakash Sarawgi

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Haryana and another

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU

¶11

Present :- Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, Advocte for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Kiran Pal Singh, AAG, Haryana.

¶13

Ms. Sadhvi Bharti, Advocate for Mr. Manish Soni, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

¶14

¶15

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.

¶16

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying for quashing of FIR No.5 dated 04.01.2022 (P-1), under Sections 406, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short ‘IPC’), registered at Police Station Sector 37, Distict Gurugram, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 20.03.2024 (P-2), entered into between the parties i.e. petitioner as well as respondent No.2.

¶17

(2) Allegations are that petitioner along with other accused induced and cheated de facto complainant to the tune of Rs.1,24,55,594/- and also threatened him for dire consequences.

¶18

PARVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶19

CRM-M-18367 of 2024 2

¶20

(3) Contends that matter has been amicably settled between the parties i.e. petitioner as well as respondent No.2; hence FIR in question as well as consequential proceedings deserve to be quashed.

¶21

(4) Learned Counsel for respondent No.2 has also acknowledged the contention raised on behalf of the petitioners.

¶22

(5) On the other hand learned State counsel vehemently opposed the prayer on the ground that petitioner is facing four other criminal cases of serious nature; hence, petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶23

(6) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.

¶24

(7) In terms of the order dated 26.11.2024 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, statements of both the parties were recorded and a report dated 13.01.2025 has been submitted in this regard by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram. The operative part of the same reads as under :-

¶25

“5. From the statements of the as well as Investigating Officer, I am satisfied that accused Gyan Prakash Sarawgi is neither absconding nor has he been declared as a Proclaimed Person/Offender in this case or in any other case. Further, besides the instant FIR, four other criminal complaints are pending against accused Gyan Prakash Sarawgi i.e. ECIR Case/1/2022 under Sections 65 & 19(3) of Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, Regular CBI/12019 uuder Sections 120B, 420, 409, 468 & 471 of IPC, Regular CBI/8/2018 under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of IPC and Regular CBI/7/2018 under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 468, 471 & 467 of IPC.”

¶26

PARVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶27

CRM-M-18367 of 2024 3

¶28

Upon perusal of the above extract, it is quite evident that petitioner is facing four other criminal cases of serious nature; therefore, prima facie, he has no respect for the rule of law.

¶29

(8) In view of the above; and more particularly when State is opposing the prayer, there is no option, except to dismiss the petition.

¶30

(9) Ordered accordingly.

¶31

(10) Needless to say that this order be not construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of allegation levelled in FIR No. 5 dated 04.01.2022 (P-1).

¶32

(11) Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

¶33

(MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU) JUDGE

¶34

06.05.2025 P.Singh

¶35

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

¶36

Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶37

PARVINDER SINGH 2025.05.08 09:51 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Gyan Prakash Sarawgi v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyan Prakash Sarawgi v. State of Haryana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narinder Pal Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Another

Harbhajan Singh and Another Vs State of Punjab and Another

Manoj Vs State of Haryana

Baljinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sayed Zoheb Ahmad Vs State of Haryana

Amit Mittal and Anr. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.