The High Court may quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C if the FIR is based on a compromise among parties and the possibility of conviction is deemed remote.

ORDER

By way of instant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C , prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No.241/2018, dated 23.11.2018, under Sections 279, 337, 338 of IPC, registered at Police Station Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P. as well as consequential proceedings, i.e. Police Challan No. 211/2019, titled State of H.P. vs. Mohan Lal, pending in the Court o learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No.2, Shimla, District Shimla, on the basis of compromise/amicable settlement (Annexure P-3) arrived inter se parties.

2. Precisely, the averments contained in the petition, which are duly supported by an affidavit as well as documents annexed therewith, reveal that FIR, sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged against the petitioner, at the behest of respondent No.2/complainant Ms. Rekha Chandel, who alleged that on 23.11.2018, while she was going in Govt. Bus bearing No. HP42-1130 from Mohri to Shimla, driver of aforesaid bus, i.e. petitioner/accused, suddenly turned the bus, as a consequence of which, bus collided with a rock, on account of which, she along with other occupants of the bus suffered injuries. On the basis of aforesaid statement made by complainant, named hereinabove, FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, came to be lodged against the petitioner/accused. After completion of investigation, police presented the challan in the competent court of law, but before the same could be taken to its logical end, petitioner entered into compromise with respondent No.2/complainant Rekha Chandel as well as other two injured persons namely Smt. Anita Devi and Smt. Sunita Devi, (Annexure P-3) whereby, both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter se them and as such, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings for quashing of FIR as well as consequent proceedings, if any, pending adjudication before the competent court of law.

3. On 04.08.2021, this Court while issuing notice to the respondents, deemed it necessary to cause presence of parties, especially, respondents No.2 to 4, at whose behest, FIR sought to be quashed, came to be lodged, so that factum with regard to compromise arrived inter se parties could be ascertained. Besides above, this Court also directed learned Additional Advocate General to verify the factum with regard to compromise from concerned police station, but same is still awaited.

4. Pursuant to order dated 04.08.2021, respondents No.2 to 4, have come present in the Court and are being represented by Mr. Jagan Nath, Advocate. Respondent No.2/complainant Ms. Rekha Chandel, at whose instance, FIR sought to be quashed, came to be lodged along with other two injured persons namely Smt. Anita Devi and Smt. Sunita Devi, state, on oath, before this Court that they of their own volition and without there being any external pressure, entered into compromise with the petitioner (Annexure P-3) whereby both the parties have resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter se them. Above named persons state before this Court that FIR sought to be quashed in the instant proceedings, is a result of misunderstanding and since nothing intentionally was done by the petitioner/accused, they do not wish to prosecute the case further lodged at their behest, in the competent court of law and as such, they have no objection, in case, prayer made in the instant petition for quashing of FIR alongwith consequent proceedings, pending before the competent court of law, is accepted. Statements of respondents No.2 to 4,