JUDGMENT :

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J.

CRL.M.A.2135/2023 (exemption)

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 540/2023

1. This is a petition for quashing of FIR No.55/2017 under Sections 279/304A IPC registered at Police Station Vasant Vihar and all proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Facts in brief are that the above FIR was lodged on the basis of DD No.47A. The allegations in the FIR are that petitioner was driving vehicle bearing No. CH 01 AZ 2534 and accident occurred with a car bearing No. No.HR 55X 4375 Wagon-R/Taxi. Consequent to the alleged accident, the driver of the Taxi was taken to the Hospital where he was declared ‘brought dead’. After the investigation, chargesheet under Sections 279/304A IPC was lodged against Sohain Kohli @ Shoaib Kohli.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that with the intervention of elders and respected persons, the parties have arrived at a settlement and thereupon MOU dated 17.01.2023 has been entered into by the parties. He further submits that continuance of the FIR No. 55/2017 under Sections 279/304A IPC registered at Police Station Vasant Vihar would be an abuse of the process of the Court in terms of the amicable settlement and this Court may quash the above mentioned FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

4. The offences under Section 279 and 304A IPC are non-compoundable offences being serious in nature. However it is a well settled proposition of law that if the Court feels that continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end, then the Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the criminal proceedings on the ground that there is a compromise between the parties. Reliance may be placed on Gian Singh v State of Punjab & Anr (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh & Ors v. State of Punjab & Anr (2014) 6 SCC 466.

5. It is pertinent to note that initially the parties had entered into an MOU dated 20.03.2017 whereby the petitioner agreed to pay a sum of Rs.21 lakhs to respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4. Respondent No.2 is the widow of the deceased and respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the children of the deceased. Pursuant to MOU dated 20.03.2017, CM(M) 1395/2017 was filed. However, the settlement could not be fructified and therefore the petition was dismissed as withdrawn on 10.04.2017. Thereafter, another settlement deed dated 22.05.2017 was entered into between the parties. Vide the said settlement, petitioner agreed to pay a sum of Rs.21,50,000/- to the respondent No.2 and second petition bearing Crl.M.C. 2165/2017 was filed. However, the same was also dismissed as withdrawn.

6. Now, the third Memorandum of Understanding/settlement dated 17.01.2023 has been arrived into between the petitioner and Respondent No. 2, widow of the deceased and mother of Respondent No. 3/Mohd. Arif Hossen and Respondent No. 4/Nazema Parvin. As per the terms of the settlement dated 17.01.2023, the parties have agreed to the following terms and conditions:-

“1. That Party of the First Part has agreed to make a payment of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees twenty five lakh only) to the Party of the Second Part being compensation, on humanitarian ground for loss of life of late Shri Najirul Islam, towards her and her two minor children namely Md. Arif Hossen (son) and Najema Parvin (daughter).

2. That the Party of the Second Part has agreed to render all assistance to the Party of the First Part in quashing/withdrawing the said FIR bearing No.55 of 2017 registered with Police Station, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi against the Party of the First Part who is named in the said FIR and for quashing of the criminal proceedings pending against the Party of the First Part, before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi.

3. That the SECOND PARTY undertakes not to lodge/file any other complaint against the FIRST PARTY who is named in the said