Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J., decided a criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, wherein the proceedings against the petitioner were quashed in light of compromise between the parties.
The petitioner was involved in a road accident in pursuance of which a criminal case was filed against him under Sections 279, 337 and 201 IPC along with Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioner submitted that there was a compromise between himself and the respondents. The parties did not wish to pursue the case further; and in light of the compromise between the parties, no purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings against the petitioner alive and hence the FIR against him may be quashed.
The High Court referred to a few Supreme Court decisions to discuss the law on the subject and observed that in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675, the SC held that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 of CrPC would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is well settled that the powers under Section 482 have no limits. Of course, where there is more power, it becomes necessary to exercise utmost care and caution while invoking such powers. The High Court also observed that even in non-compoundable offences, if the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the dispute amicably, then for the purpose of securing justice, the FIR may be quashed.
In the instant matter, the Court was of the view that parties had amicably settled the dispute in terms of the compromise, and thus the petition was allowed and the FIR against the petitioner was quashed. [Deepak Khurana v. State of H.P., 2018 SCC OnLine HP 145, order dated 9.2.2018]
