JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J. - The present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) has been filed for quashing FIR No.46/2018 dated 27.01.2018, registered in Police Station Neb Sarai, Delhi, for offence under Section 308/34 IPC.

2. Fir No.46/2018 has been registered on the complaint of respondent No.2. In the complaint it is stated that on 26.01.2018, when the complainant and his friend Dheeraj/respondent No.3 herein were returning from their coaching on his Splendor Bike, at about 8:00-8:15 PM, they were stopped by the accused near Sona Public School. It is stated that Sunny/petitioner No.2 kicked the bike and the complainant and his friend fell down from the bike and the petitioners started beating Dheeraj/respondent No.3. It is stated that when the complainant/respondent No.2 tried to stop the accused, the accused started abusing the complainant and started fighting with him. It is stated that the accused Sunny/petitioner No.1 picked up a danda and hit the complainant on his head and the complainant fell on the ground. When people gathered there the accused threatened the complainant of dire consequences and left. It is stated that the brother of the complainant came there and called the Police. A PCR Van came and took the victims to the AIIMS Trauma Centre. In the MLC the doctor recorded the nature of injury and it was opined that the victim had sustained minor head injury with left periorbital swelling. Charge-sheet has been filed against the accused. The accused/petitioner No.2 has been granted anticipatory bail on 04.02.2018.

3. This petition has been filed on the ground that after the intervention of the parents and well-wishers the parties have stated to settle their disputes. A settlement deed dated 16.02.2021 (Annexure P-4) has been filed.

4. The present case is for quashing the criminal proceedings for offences under Section 308 IPC. There was a conflict of opinion in various judgments by the Supreme Court as to whether an offence under Section 307 IPC could be quashed by the High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149, held that an offence under Section 307 IPC cannot be quashed by the High Court while exercising its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C on the ground that the parties have settled their disputes. The Supreme Court observed as under:

"15. We are not prepared to say that the crime alleged to have been committed by the accused persons was a crime against an individual, on the other hand it was a crime against the society at large. Criminal law is designed as a mechanism for achieving social control and its purpose is the regulation of conduct and activities within the society. Why Section 307 IPC is held to be non-compoundable, is because the Code has identified which conduct should be brought within the ambit of non-compoundable offences. Such provisions are not meant just to protect the individual but the society as a whole. The High Court was not right in thinking that it was only an injury to the person and since the accused persons (sic victims) had received the monetary compensation and settled the matter, the crime as against them was wiped off. Criminal justice system has a larger objective to achieve, that is, safety and protection of the people at large and it would be a lesson not only to the offender, but to the individuals at large so that such crimes would not be committed by any one and money would not be a substitute for the crime committed against the society. Taking a lenient view on a serious offence like the present, will leave a wrong impression about the criminal justice system and will encourage further criminal acts, which will endanger the peaceful co-existence and welfare of the society at large." (emphasis supplied)

On the other hand the Supreme Court in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, after noticing the judgment in State of Rajasthan v.