The power to quash criminal proceedings based on settlement should be exercised sparingly and with caution, and the types of cases where such power should or should not be exercised were highlighted by the court.

1. This petition has been filed under section 482 of the Cr. P.C. seeking quashing of FIR 152/2012 under section 279/337/304A IPC with PS Parliament Street on the ground that the matter has been settled between the petitioner and the legal heirs of the deceased-It is stated that the petitioner is working in an organisation specialising in business process outsourcing (BPO) and also a graduate. He was driving a Maruti SX4 car and met with an accident with a truck at Firozshah Kotla Road, KG Marg Crossing, New Delhi. One of the labourers was sitting on top of the said truck, who fell on the road, died. It is also alleged that the petitioner had made the first calf to the police reporting the accident. The charge sheet is stated to have been filed before the trial court and the matter is now stated to be posted for 4th September, 2014. The respondents 2 to 8, the legal heirs of the deceased, are present in court and are identified by their counsel. Further documents of their identification have also been an­nexed to this petition.

2. Issue notice.

3. Notice is accepted by Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for State and Mr. Pranesh, Advocate for respondent No. 2 to 8.

4. The counsel for the state submits that the matter has been settled between the parties. There is also no special allegation of drunken driving by the petitioner who is stated to be 29 years old. No useful purpose will be served where the legal heirs of the complainant are not supporting the prosecution any further Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which 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 and also Narinder Singh and Ors. State of Punjab and Anr. 2014 (2) JCC 1460 : 2014(2) Crimes 27 (SC) where the Supreme Court held as follows: --

“31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:

(I) Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Sec­tion 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal, proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between them­selves. However, this power is to be ex­ercised sparingly and with caution.

(II) When the parties have reached the settlement, and on that basis petition for (flashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure:

(i) ends of justice, or

(ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.

While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives.

(III) Such a power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, da-coity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely oh the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be qua