IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL th ON THE 7 OF JULY, 2023 MISC. PETITION No. 756 of 2021 BETWEEN:-

ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED THR. OFFICE AT TP HUB 1561 NAPIER TOWN DR. BARAT ROAD RUSSEL CHOWK JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI DIWAKAR NATH SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)

AND

1. SMT. VINOD KUMARI W/O MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, VILLAGE POST CHNNODI P.S. BUDHAR DISTT. SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. MAHENDRA PRATAP SINGH S/O LATE GANESH PRATAP SINGH, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, VILLAGE POST CHINNODI PS BUDHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. AJAY KUMAR BAIGA S/O SHYAMLAL BAIGA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, GANDHIGRAM POST GANDHIGRAM DISTT.SIDHI CURRENTLY POST SUB INSPECTOR PS DHANPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENTS (SHRI ABHISHEK GULATI - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3)

This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioner-Oriental Insurance Company Limited, being aggrieved of order dated Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHWANI

08.02.2020, passed in MACC No.19/2019, in the Lok Adalat of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Budhar, District Shahdol (M.P.), whereby, Insurance Company had entered into a compromise with the claimants i.e. legal heirs of deceased Sudeep @ Rishi Baiga for a sum of Rs.9,25,000/- on a ground that after entering into the said compromise with the claimants, Insurance Company came across statements of Ajay Baiga, which were recorded on 30.01.2019, at Police Station Kotwali, District Shahdol, in the form of Dehati Marg Intimation under Section 174 Cr.P.C., wherein, he has mentioned that offending car was being driven by his brother-in-law Arjun Baiga. It is submitted that since Arjun Baiga was not having valid driving licence, therefore, subsequently a new story was cooked up while recording Marg Intimation under Section 174 Cr.P.C. at Police Station Budhar, District Shahdol and there injured Ajay Kumar Baiga replaced himself as the driver of the offending vehicle.

2. Shri Shukla, reading from Annx.P/5, submits that there is no provision for recording statements of an accused under Section 161 Cr.P.C., yet statements of Ajay Kumar Baiga were recorded as are contained in Annx.P/5, and this fortifies his doubt on behalf of the Insurance Company that this is a case of false implication, wherein, after realising that deceased Arjun Baiga was not having a valid driving licence, co-passenger Ajay Kumar Baiga took the responsibility of driving upon his own shoulder with a view to seek undue compensation from the Insurance Company and therefore, the impugned compromise made in the Lok Adalat as contained in Annx.P/2, be set aside.

3. Shri Abhishek Gulati, Advocate for respondent No.3, submits that this aspect has been wrongly projected by the Insurance Company in the Miscellaneous Petition, which is contrary to facts.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ASHWANI

4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, first submission made by Shri Shukla, that statements of accused are never recorded as are contained in Annx.P/5, is not made out, inasmuch as, the heading of the statement of 'Kathan Ahat' i.e. statements which were recorded, were of the injured and not of the accused. Till those statements were recorded, it was not ascertainable as to who was the accused. Secondly, as far as two Marg Intimations are concerned, both were recorded on 30.01.2019. Date of incident is 29.01.2019. Annx.P/3 is Marg Intimation recorded at Police Station Kotwali, whereas, Annx.P/4 is the Marg Intimation which was recorded at Police Station Budhar. Annx.P/4 was recorded by the informant/complainant Shiv Prasad. It was recorded at 11:33 hours. Marg Intimation Annx.P/3, was recorded at Shahdol at 10:00 P.M. Now from the record of the Claims Tribunal, it is evident that neither Investigating Officer was summoned to clarify as to how st