Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court: This petition was filed before a Single Judge Bench of Rajbir Sehrawat, J., in order to quash an FIR registered under Sections 120-B, 406, 420 of Penal Code and other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

Facts of the case were such that petitioner wanted to receive distributorship from “Bombay Dyeing” from alleged and was assured of the same but since the alleged refused, petitioner filed a complaint about cheating against the alleged. Petitioner was charged for conspiring under the registered FIR. It was contended by petitioner that Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and Sections 420, 406 of IPC are mutually exclusive thus if the complaint has been filed under Section 138 then FIR under Sections 420 and 406 of Penal Code cannot be lodged for the same cause of action and hence liable to be quashed.

High Court stated that there is no such concept as “same cause of action” or “cause of action” in criminal jurisprudence. Once material against petitioner was found for involvement in a conspiracy then per se FIR cannot be quashed. On the contention of the offences being mutually exclusive, the court was of the view that an accused is liable to be punished from the stage of an attempt to commission of the offence and various offences like this can be charged together. It was discussed that Section 138 has a limited scope of trial and punishment for the offence and if the plea of the offences being exclusive to each other is taken then that would mean that other offences not covered under Section 138 cannot be filed. The Court found no application of Section 300 of Criminal procedure code and Article 20 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the petition was dismissed as no ground to quash the FIR was found. [Sazid Khan v. State of Haryana,2018 SCC OnLine P&H 1733, decided on 27-07-2018]

4 comments

  • Whether issuance of old cheqe offence under 138 N I act

  • Please give me an advise that Can FIR be lodged against an accused under section 138 N I ACT alongwith section 420 IPC

  • Dashrath rupsingh case there is an offside. I agree with this decision. Not exclusive at all. A person can commit cheating offence and in furtherance cause 138 offence. Smuggling gold punishable under customs, FERA and any other appropriate Act is gold standard

  • Thete are other decisions of various court that both prosecution will not lie together

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.