Sampatiya Bai W/O. Shravankumar ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. P.S.O. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 6365 Bom

                                          1                                      jg.apl 385.17.odt

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, 
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                 Criminal Application (APL) No. 385 of 2017

(1) Sampatiya Bai W/o Shravankumar Kaureti 
      Age :- 26 Years, Occ : Housewife, 

(2) Lalsingh S/o Salam Kaureti 
      Age :- 55 Years, Occ : Private

(3) Dipaklal S/o Lalsingh Kaureti 
      Age :- 22 Years, Occ : labour, 
      All above R/o Ganeri Tah, Dhanora, 
      Dist, Seoni., M.P. 

(4) Mukesh S/o Rajaram Chaudhary 
      Age :- 40 Years, Occ :- Private
      R/o Gokuldham Society, Plot No. 96, 
      Nagpur Road, Kamptee, Dist. Nagpur

(5) Dipak S/o Beniram Bagde
      Age :- 41, Occ : Driver,
      R/o Bina Sangam, Tah. Kamptee, 
      Dist. Nagpur                                                          .... Applicants

      //  Versus //

State of Maharashtra
Through P.S.O. Khaperkheda
Dist. Nagpur                                                           .... Non-applicant

Shri N. S. Giripunje, Advocate for the applicants 
Shri P. S. Tembhare, Additional Public Prosecutor for the non-applicant 
                                                     
                                    CORAM      : SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                 M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
                                     DATE  : 18-08-2017.

JUDGMENT (Per : M. G. GIRATKAR, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal

.....2/-

2 jg.apl 385.17.odt

application is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of

the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The applicant nos. 1 to 5 prayed to quash and set aside FIR

No. 294/2017 registered by Police Station, Khaperkheda for the offences

punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code read

with Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is submitted that the

applicant no. 3 is the complainant. The applicant no. 1 is the wife of

deceased Shravankumar S/o Lalsingh Kaureti. The applicant no. 2 is the

father of deceased and the applicant no. 3 is the brother of deceased

Shravankumar. The applicant no. 4 is the owner of vehicle/truck

bearing No. MH31-AP-6718 and the applicant no. 5 is the driver of the

said truck.

3. First Information Report came to be lodged against the

applicant no. 5 on the report of the applicant no. 3. Brother of applicant

no. 3, namely, Shravankumar and other labours were going by truck

bearing No. MH31-AP-6718 from Sangam Jod. Suddenly, deceased

Shravankumar fell down from the truck and sustained severe injury. He

was immediately admitted to the Government Hospital. Doctor declared

him dead. On the basis of the report of the applicant no. 3, crime was

registered against the applicant no. 5.

.....3/-

3 jg.apl 385.17.odt

4. It is submitted that the applicant no. 1 - wife of deceased, the

applicant no. 2 - father of deceased and the applicant no. 3 - brother of

deceased are relatives of the applicant no. 4 who is owner of the truck

bearing No. MH31-AP-6718. The applicants have settled their dispute

amicably on 7-6-2017. The applicant nos. 1 to 3 received compensation

of Rs. 1,25,000/- on account of accidental death of Shravankumar. It is

submitted that offences are non-compoundable, therefore, it is prayed to

quash and set aside FIR No. 294/2017.

5. Non-applicant - State filed reply and submitted that offence

punishable under Section 279 and 304-A of IPC are non-compoundable

and there is sufficient evidence against the applicant no. 5, hence,

application is liable to be rejected.

6. Heard learned counsel Shri Giripunje for the applicants. He

has submitted that the parties have settled their matter out of the Court.

The applicant nos. 1 to 3 received amount of compensation from the

applicant nos. 4 and 5. He has pointed out us settlement deed. Learned

counsel pointed out decision in the case of Avinash Chawla Vs. State

and anr. in Cri. M.C. No. 4942/2015 of the High Court of Delhi dated

4-12-2015.

.....4/-

4 jg.apl 385.17.odt

7. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Tembhare

for the non-applicant. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the

application.

8. From perusal of FIR, it appears that accident took place due

to application of jack. From perusal of FIR and registration of crime for

the offence punishable under Section 304-A of IPC clearly shows that

there was no any mens rea of the applicant no. 5. Suddenly, accident

took place due to application of jack.

9. In the case of Avinash Chawla Vs. State and anr. (cited

supra) it is held by Delhi High Court that :

7. Undisputedly, offence punishable under Sections 279/304-A IPC are not compoundable, however, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, this Court has power to accept the compromise. Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant. ...

10. In the present case, the applicant no. 1 who is wife, the

applicant no. 2 who is father and the applicant no. 3 who is brother of

deceased have settled their matter with the applicant nos. 4 and 5. They

.....5/-

5 jg.apl 385.17.odt

have also received amount of compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/-. In view of

the above cited judgment, we allow the criminal application in terms of

prayer clause [B] and hereby quash and set aside FIR No. 294/2017

registered for the offences punishable under Sections 279 and 304-A of

the Indian Penal Code read with Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

registered in Police Station Khaperkheda, District Nagpur.

                JUDGE                                               JUDGE


wasnik




                                                                                         ...../-