TARUN GARG Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed by petitioner-accused, pending investigation in criminal proceedings in case under Sections 279, 337 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 187 of Motor Vehicles Act in FIR No. 59 of 2014 dated 19.4.2014, registered with Police Station, Amb, District Una, H.P., for quashing the FIR and criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance thereto, on the basis of compromise, (Annexure P-2) dated 10.06.2017, arrived at between petitioner-accused and complainant-respondent No. 2 along with injured Manmohan Sharma.

(2.) Respondent No. 2 and injured, duly identified by respective counsel, present in person in Court today, endorse compromise, (Annexure P-2) and in their statements, recorded on oath in this Court, have not only reiterated signing of the compromise by them and accused with free consent and will without any coercion and pressure but also deposed to the effect that the accident had not occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of accused. Complainant has deposed that he was pillion rider in motor cycle No. PB-02V-8727 which struck with car No. UAE-07Q-0063, being driven by present petitioner at that time and he lodged FIR against the petitioner on the basis of observation, as at that time it appeared that accident had occurred on account of fault of car driver, but later on, on explanation given by the petitioner, he came to know that accident had not taken place because of rash and negligent driving of accused. The deposition of injured namely Manmohan Sharma, is also to the same effect.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of respondent-State that accused is not entitled to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court to exercise its power on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties with respect to an offence not compoundable under Section 320 Cr.PC.