Allowed

Naveen Kumar v. State of Hp and Anr.

Himachal Pradesh HC9 Sept 2022CRMMO/623/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh granted a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of an FIR under motor vehicle and IPC offenses. Based on a recorded settlement and the applicant's remorse, the court held that quashing the FIR would serve the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

The petition was allowed; FIR No. 85/2021 dated 30.07.2021 under Sections 279, 337, 338 IPC and Section 187 MV Act and consequential proceedings were ordered to be quashed.

Naveen Kumar Vs State of Hp and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Himachal Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA ON THE 9^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022.

¶2

BEFORE

¶3

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYEN VAIDYA

¶4

CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION MAIN (ORIGINAL) U/S 482 CRPC NO. 623 OF 2022.

¶5

Between:-

¶6

NAVEEN KUMAR, S/O SH. PUNNU RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAJOUR, P.O. PRANGHALA, TEHSIL DALHOUSIE, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P. AGED 35 YEARS.

¶7

….PETITIONER.

¶8

(BY MR. RAHIL MAHAJAN & MR. VINAY MEHTA, ADVOCATES)

¶9

AND

¶10

1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.

¶11

2. BHUPINDER SINGH, S/O SH. PARAS RAM, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARI, P.O. TUNDI, TEHSIL SIHUNTA, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.

¶12

3. SHRI KUNJ LAL S/O SH. HANS RAJ, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BARI, P.O. TUNDI, TEHSIL SIHUNTA, DISTRICT CHAMBA, H.P.

¶13

….RESPONDENTS.

¶14

(MR. DESH RAJ THAKUR, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL, MR. NARENDER THAKUR, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL AND MR. MANOJ

¶15

…2…

¶16

BAGGA, ASSISTANT ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR RESPONDENT NO.1. MR. DIWAN SINGH NEGI, ADVOCATE, FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 & 3)

¶17

This petition coming on for admission after notice this day, the Court passed the following:-

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

By way of this petition, FIR No. 85/2021, dated 30.07.2021, under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the IPC and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, registered at Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, H.P. and consequential proceedings of case titled, State of H.P. Vs. Naveen Kumar pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1, Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P., are sought to be quashed.

¶20

It is averred in the petition that the parties have amicably settled the matter with the intervention of family members and other respectable persons of the society. It is further submitted that they intend to live in peace by burying all their past disputes.

¶21

…3…

¶22

Parties are present in person today. Their separate statements on oath have been recorded. They have reiterated the contents of the petition and have specifically stated that they have entered into a compromise, copy of which has been placed on record as Annexure P-2. They have undertaken to abide by the terms of the compromise. Injured/victims have specifically stated that they have entered into an amicable settlement with the petitioner keeping in view the conduct of the petitioner after the accident. According to them, the petitioner has shown remorse and helped them during their recovery period not only by providing medical help but also personally attending upon them.

¶23

I have gone through the contents of the compromise Annexure P-2. The terms of said compromise cannot be said to be unlawful. Hence, there is no legal impediment in allowing the prayer of the petitioner.

¶24

From the statements of the parties recorded today in Court, it is evident that their intent to live in peace is bonafide. Petitioner had shown remorse after the accident and extended all possible help to the victims/injured. The

¶25

…4…

¶26

victims had suffered personal injuries and in case of grant of prayer of the petitioner for quashing of the FIR, the interest of the society at large is not going to suffer. Rather, the interest of justice will served by allowing the prayer of the petitioner as the parties will get an opportunity in life to live peacefully.

¶27

The object of every legal system is to maintain peace and harmony. In furtherance thereof, this Court deems it fit to grant the prayer made in the petition.

¶28

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and FIR No. 85/2021, dated 30.07.2021, under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the IPC and Section 187 of the Motor Vehicles Act, registered at Police Station Chowari, District Chamba, H.P. and consequential proceedings of case titled, State of H.P. Vs. Naveen Kumar pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.1, Dalhousie, District Chamba, H.P., are ordered to be quashed.

¶29

Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶30

(Satyen Vaidya) Judge

¶31

9^th September, 2022. (jai)

Naveen Kumar v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naveen Kumar v. State of Hp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swarit Malhotra Vs State of Hp

Prem Chand Vs State of Hp

Nirmal Kumar Guleria Vs State of Hp

State Vs Firoz Khan

Gursharn Kaur Vs State of Hp and Anr.

Rajesh Kumar Vs Ram Chander