Abuse of process in proclamation-based prosecution ends once cheque dishonour complaint is compromised and withdrawn.

Where an FIR under Section 174-A IPC arose only because the accused had been declared a proclaimed person in cheque dishonour proceedings, its continuation became untenable after the underlying complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act was withdrawn on compromise and the complainant acknowledged receipt of the full cheque amount. The operative basis for the FIR had disappeared once the foundation proceedings ended, and prosecution on the sole ground of earlier non-appearance was treated as oppressive and an abuse of process. The FIR and consequential proceedings were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the FIR under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the consequential proceedings deserved to be quashed after the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 had been withdrawn on compromise and the petitioner was no longer liable in the underlying cheque dishonour proceedings.

Analysis: The FIR had been registered only because the petitioner was declared a proclaimed person in the cheque dishonour proceedings. The record showed that the complainant had received the entire cheque amount, had stated that nothing remained due, and had withdrawn the complaint. Once the foundation proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act ended on compromise, continuation of the FIR based solely on the earlier non-appearance was treated as oppressive and unwarranted. The Court followed the view that in such circumstances prosecution under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 amounts to abuse of the process of law.

Conclusion: The FIR and all consequential proceedings were quashed in favour of the petitioner.

---