SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Gau) 1210

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
KAKHETO SEMA, J.
Kemo Ete, S/o. Late Geke Ete and Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of A.P., Represented through the Ld. Public Prosecutor - Respondent
Crl. Petn. No. 96 of 2022
Decided On : 05-12-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mipe Ete.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 279, 337 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 – Saving of inherent power of High Court – Causing hurt by act – Learned counsel petitioners learned Addl. P.P. State of Arunachal Pradesh petition has been jointly filed by petitioner invoking inherent powers of this Court for quashing FIR which is registered – Held, Court by invoking the inherent powers accepting compromise executed between petitioners quash and set aside FIR which is registered – Charge Sheet criminal proceedings pending against petitioner court of learned West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh in connection with above referred case – Petition is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. M. Ete, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. L. Hage, learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.

2. This petition has been jointly filed by the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No.2 invoking the inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR dated 07.05.2018 which is registered as Aalo P.S. Case No. 25/2018 under section 279/337 IPC, the Charge Sheet No. 113/2018 dated 27.12.2018 and the proceedings pending before the court of the learned CJM, Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh.

3. The petitioner No.1 is the alleged accused in the case and the petitioner No.2 is the complainant/victim.

4. The fact of the case in brief is that on 07.05.2018 due to the rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle bearing registration No. AR 08A-7068 driven by the petitioner No. 1, it hit the motorcycle bearing registration No. AR 08A6325 driven by the petitioner No.2 at the main road near Angam Hotel at Aalo as a result of which the petitioner No.2 fell down from his bike and sustained bodily injury and at the same time damaged the motorcycle belonging to the petitioner No.2. In the said accident, the petitioner No.1 also sustained injury. As a fallout of the said accident, the petitioner No.2 filed the FIR dated 07.05.2018 which was registered as Aalo P.S. Case No. 25/18 under section 279/337 IPC. Subsequent to the accident both the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2 were treated at General Hospital, Aalo. In the medical report furnished by the Doctor, the nature of injuries sustained by both the petitioners is stated to be ‘simple injury’.

5. The case was thereafter investigated by the Police and the Charge Sheet No. 113/2018 dated 27.12.2018 under section 279/337 IPC was filed against the petitioner No.1. The case is presently pending consideration of charge in the court of learned CJM, Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh.

6. When the matter was thus situated and before the commencement of the trial both the petitioners, with the intervention of the elders of the clan members of the parties, have entered into an agreement consenting to mutually settle the case between them by executing the agreement dated 19.08.2022 and by which both the petitioners have resolved to amicably settle the matter between them.

9. In the light of the agreement executed between the parties for mutual settlement of the dispute, the present petition has been filed by the petitioners under section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing the FIR dated 07.05.2018 registered as Aalo P.S. Case No 25/18, the Charge Sheet No. 113/2018 dated 27.12.2018 and the consequential criminal proceeding pending before the learned CJM, Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh.

10. Mr. M. Ete, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since both the parties have executed the agreement dated 19.08.2022 mutually settling the dispute between them, the continuation of the criminal proceeding against the petitioner No.1, which is yet to commence trial, would be an exercise in futility as the complainant/victim would be no longer interested to prosecute the case against the petitioner No.1. The learned counsel for the petitioners would therefore, submit that in the interest of justice, the case pending against the petitioner No.1 may be compounded by accepting the compromise agreement executed between the parties.

11. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the case lodged against the petitioner No.1 by the petitioner No.2 is not heinous or serious in nature affecting the society at large but arose purely out of an accidental incident in which both the parties sustained simple injuries. Mr. M. Ete also submits that the petitioner No.1 is a student who is pursuing his B.Sc degree course at St. Joseph College, Bangaluru, Karnataka and therefore, submits that if the case is allowed to proceed against the petitioner No.1 without accepting the compromise agree

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top