JUDGMENT

Anoop Chitkara, J. - The present petition is under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing of F.I.R. No. 231/18, dated 3-11-2018, registered at Police Station Dhalli, District -Shimla (H.P.) under Sections 279 and 337 IPC and for quashing of all consequent Criminal proceedings.

2. The present F.I.R. stands registered on the basis of information given by Dharuv Kumar, who has been arrayed as respondent No. 2 in the present petition.

FACTS:

3. The gist of the entire case is as follows:

(a) The present FIR was registered on the basis of information given by Dharuv Kumar (respondent no.2.) to police Station-Dhalli, Shimla, H.P.

(b) He has stated that he is driver by profession and is also an apprentice with a mechanic.

(c) On 3-11-2018 at 2:00 p.m., (day time) he received a phone call from Manohar Singh that his vehicle required servicing. Then to bring that vehicle for servicing, he went to the house of Manohar Singh which is near I.H.M. at Kufri. From there he brought his car bearing registration No. HP63A-4231 from Kufri. Beside him, Manohar Singh, and Arun Jaryal were also sitting in the car.

(d) At about 2:25 p.m., when he reached at a place Thanda Pani near Chharabra, then from the opposite direction, a Santro Car, bearing registration No. CH01Y-1364, came with a very high speed and hit his car. Both the cars suffered extensive damage and people sitting in both the cars received injuries. Later on he came to know name of the driver of the Santro car as Chander Mohan Thakur (petitioner)

(e) The present petition has been filed by the accused Chander Mohan Thakur for quashing of FIR. In this petition, in paragraph no. 2, petitioner claimed that at the time of accident there was a dense fog and due to low visibility accident took place.

(f) He further stated on affidavit that he had applied brakes and also blew horn but respondent no. 2 got confused and the vehicles skidded and collided with each other.

(g) He further stated that after the accident, first aid was given to the injured persons, who were discharged on the same date.

(h) That on the spot the matter had been compromised between the parties but police insisted upon registration of FIR.

(i) Now the parties have entered into a written compromise which has been placed on record as annexure P2.

(j) Sh. Dharuv (respondent no.2) had put in appearance in the Court on 19 th June, 2019. He made a statement on oath that he has compromised the entire matter with the accused Chander Mohan, the present petitioner.

(K) Similarly, the statement of Manohar Singh, one of the injured, was also recorded. He also stated that he has compromised the matter with the present petitioner. The statements are placed on record.

REASONING:

4. The following aspects would be relevant to arrive at a final conclusion in this petition:-

(a) When the accident had taken place then only witnesses to such accident were petitioner, Dharuv (respondent no.2), Arun Jaryal, Manohar Singh, Promila and Sheetal, who were sitting in these two vehicles.

(b) Mr. I.N.Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner has placed on record another compromise deed dated 18 th June, 2019, which has been entered into between all the injured persons and between all the occupants of the car.

(c) As per the evidence collected on the spot as well as inferable from compromise deeds, only minor injuries were received by the occupants of the cars.

(d) All the injured persons have amicably settled the matter between them and stated that at the time of accident, there was dense fog. It was also raining and due to this visibility was very low.

(e) The entire facts and evidence, point out that accident just happened due to factors beyond the control of humans and not because of the fault of any of the driver, certainly not because of the petitioner/accused.

(f) Judicial notice can be taken of the fact that when it is raining, then the friction between tyres of the vehicle and the surface of the road reduces. Secondly, on the day of accident it was