TARUN PURI Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No.235 of 2017, dated 8.8.2017, under Sections 279 and 337 of Indian Penal Code ( for short 'IPC'), registered with Police Station, Haroli, District Una, H.P., as well as consequent proceedings pending adjudication in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate,1st Class, Court No.III, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh, on the basis of the amicable settlement arrived inter se parties.

(2.) Averments contained in the petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, reveals that FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged at the behest of respondent No.2 (hereinafter 'complainant') Karanveer Singh, who alleged that on 7.8.2017, at around 9:30 PM r namely, Sh. when his car reached at a place known as Inder Palace, Tehsil and District Una, one motorcycle being driven in rash and negligent manner by the petitioner came in a high speed and hit the car, as a consequence of which, driver of the motorcycle and the pillion rider fell down on the road and suffered multiple injuries. He also alleged that passengers of the car being driven by him, also received injuries. On the basis of aforesaid statement made by respondent No.2/complainant FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged at police Station, Haroli, District Una, Himachal Pradesh. After completion of the investigation, police presented the challan in the competent Court of law and same is still pending adjudication.

(3.) Prior to filing of the petition at hand, petitioner herein had filed similar petition i.e. Cr.MMO No.261 of 2019, praying therein for quashment of FIR as well as consequence proceedings and Co-­ordinate Bench of this Court while passing the judgment dated 17.6.2019 though recorded the statement of the complainant, wherein he fairly acknowledged the factum with regard to compromise inter se petitioner and injured, but since petitioner Tarun Puri failed to implead injured in the aforesaid petition, earlier petition having been filed by the petitioner Tarun Puri came to be disposed of, reserving liberty to the petitioner to file petition afresh on the same and similar grounds. In the aforesaid background, petition at hand has been filed by the petitioner, wherein he apart from complainant has also impleaded the injured as party respondent.