The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. when the victim and the offender have settled their dispute, as emphasized by the principle laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another.

ORDER :

1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutors waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Rohan Vaghela, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of the original complainant-respondent no. 2.

2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”) for quashing and setting aside the FIR bearing CR No. I-13/2017 registered with Mangrol Marine Police Station, Junagadh for offences punishable under Sections 304A and 114 of the IPC.

3. Mr. Dipak Dave, learned advocate for the applicants submits that the complainant has settled the issue with Pashchim Gujarat Vij Company Limited since the applicants-accused are the employees of the Company and there is no criminal negligence of the applicants and the case of the complainant is that his daughter, who was studying in Std.10 in Divasa Village, was on her way to school and one 11 KV live wire fell on her body resulting into her death. Mr. Dave submits that initially accidental death was reported and thus, on further report, FIR came to be filed. Mr. Dave submits that the allegation is that the accident could have been avoided but for improper guarding and maintenance of the electricity, the incident has occurred. Mr. Dave submits that there is no case of any negligence of any of the applicants and at the most, the complainant could show the civil negligence of the electricity Company and for that, he could be compensated for the loss of his child and as per the norms of GUVNL, requisite compensation would be Rs.2 lacs to be paid to the family of the victim.

4. Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned APP for the respondent-State submits that in case of electrocution, the criminal liability is required to be laid down though the direct act of the applicants could not be attributed. Learned APP submits that this is a case of death of a minor child who could be a good citizen of the country and would have contributed for the development.

5. Mr. Rohan Vaghela, learned advocate for the complainant-respondent no. 2 submits that the complainant is present before this Court with the affidavit who has, from the incident, not found any criminal negligence of the applicants and therefore, according to him, he does not have any dispute against PGVCL or the officers and for that purpose, he has filed the affidavit. The complainant is present before this Court who is identified by learned advocate Mr. Vaghela. Let his Vakalatnama be accepted on record. The complainant has affirmed the affidavit which is notarized on 19.1.2023 and states that he does not want to pursue further the criminal complaint against the applicants. The complainant categorically stated that the complainant has no grievance against the applicants and that the complainant has no objection to quashment of the impugned FIR.

6. The Sections which have been invoked against the present applicants are Sections 304A and 114 of the IPC. To constitute an offence under Section 304A, it would be necessary for the prosecution to establish that the accused were rash and negligent in their act not amounting to culpable homicide. Here, the present applicants are the employees of the PGVCL and the allegation is that while the child - minor girl of the complainant was going to her school, where live wire fell on her and which has resulted into electrocution. There is no direct evidence of any person much less the present applicants working at the place, where live wire fell on the child. It is stated that the wire was laid down in the year 2012 and snapping occurred because of squirrel and the said act cannot be attributed to the present applicants. Taking this fact into consideration, the settlement is accepted since no direct nexus could be connected with the electrocution to any of the act to constitute as rash and negligent act of the present applicants. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited had paid the compensation to the complainant. Considering t