Himachal Pradesh High Court
Manoj Kumar vs State Of Himachal Pradesh & Others on 24 October, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Cr. MMO No. 383 of 2024.
Date of Decision: 24th October, 2024.
Manoj Kumar .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & others .....Respondents.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Diwakar Dev Sharma, Additional
Advocate General, for respondent
No.1/State.
Mr. R.L.Verma, Advocate vice Mr. Tek
Chand, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral).
By way of instant petition filed under Section 528 of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a prayer has
been made on behalf of the petitioners for quashing of FIR
No. 17 dated 28.03.2023, under Sections 279, 337 and 338
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 185 of M.V.Act,
registered at Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla
West, District Shima as well as consequential proceedings
arising therefrom.
2. The averments contained in the petition, which is
duly supported by an affidavit reveals that on 28.03.2023
complainant/respondent No.2 had got a FIR registered
against the present petitioner FIR No. 17 dated 28.03.2023,
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code
and Section 185 of M.V.Act. However, during the pendency
of proceedings the dispute inter se parties has been settled
amicably vide compromise deed dated 08.04.2024, copy
whereof is appended along with the present petition as
Annexure P-2.
3. Statements of complainant/respondent No.2 and
victim/ respondent No.3 stand recorded. They have
categorically stated that they have entered into
compromise of their own free will, volition and without any
pressure. According to the them, the dispute inter se
parties stands amicably settled between the parties.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record carefully.
5. This Court sees no impediment in quashing the FIR
in issue, as the dispute inter se the parties stands amicably
resolved.
6. From a perusal of Section 359 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is evident that in so far
as Section 279 IPC and Section 187 of M.V.Act, are
concerned, the same are not compoundable.
7. In this respect, attention of this Court has been
drawn to a case titled Narinder Singh and others vs.
State of Punjab and another reported as (2014) 6
Supreme Court Cases, 466, wherein the Apex Court has
categorically laid down that the High Court has inherent
power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those
cases, which are not compoundable, where the parties
have amicably settled the matter inter se them. However,
this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution, in
cases where settlement is arrived at. The guiding factors
being securing the ends of justice or to prevent an abuse of
the process of any Court.
8. Further, the Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir alias
Parbathbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and others vs.
State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641
summarizing the broad principles regarding inherent
powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has
recognized that these powers are not inhibited by
provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C.
9. In view of the fact that the parties have entered into
compromise permitting the proceedings in pursuance to
the aforesaid FIR sought to be quashed to continue would
only result into an abuse of process and the same would
not secure the ends of justice.
10. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 17
dated 28.03.2023, under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 185 of M.V.Act, registered at
Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla West, District
Shima as well as consequential proceedings arising
therefrom are quashed.
The petition stands disposed of in the above terms,
so also the pending application(s), if any.
(Bipin Chander Negi)
Judge
24th October, 2024
(Nisha)
