Devon Lepcha And Ors. vs State of Sikkim

The Petitioners are before this Court with an Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of the FIR

bearing No. 242/2017, dated 21.09.2017, registered at the Sadar Police Station, under Section 279/337/338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with

Section 184/185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. They also seek quashing of the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 81 of 2018 (State of Sikkim vs.

Devon Lepcha) pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate (East Sikkim) at Gangtok.

It is the Petitioners case that pending trial in which substance of accusation was prepared against the Petitioner No.1 under Section 279/337 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860, they have amicably settled the matter amongst themselves towards which a Compromise Deed dated 25.08.2018 has been

executed. The offences, being non-compoundable, the parties are before this Court seeking the reliefs as mentioned hereinabove.

The State Respondent had no serious objection to the matter considering that the parties have amicably resolved the issue. It was submitted that in

such circumstances, prosecuting the accused i.e. Petitioner No.1 would serve no fruitful purpose with the probability of witnesses turning hostile or

refusing to give evidence.

Considered submissions of learned Counsel and perused the documents on record.

The Prosecution case is that on 21.09.2017, the Petitioner No.2 (the victim) was hit by a vehicle bearing Registration No. SK-01-P-9773 at Swastik,

Burtuk, East Sikkim, said to be driven by the Petitioner No. 1 (the accused). The Petitioner No. 3 (Jorden Thinlay Bhutia, father of Petitioner No.2)

lodged a First Information Report before the Sadar Police Station on the same date pursuant to which criminal case being FIR No. 242/2017 dated

21.09.2017, under Section 279/337/338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 184/185 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, was registered. On

completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the Petitioner No.1 under Section 279/338 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section

184/182/190(2)/196/192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, East Sikkim at Gangtok, which was

registered as G.R. Case No.81 of 2018. The Petitioners, i.e. the victim as well as the accused person and the father of the victim, have amicably

settled the matter vide a Compromise Deed on 25.08.2018. I have perused the Compromise Deed.

In Narendra Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Ors. : (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with a similar

circumstance in which the First Information Report was registered under Section 307/324/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, would observe as

follows;

“33. We have gone through the FIR as well which was recorded on the basis of statement of the complainant/victim. It gives an indication that the

complainant was attacked allegedly by the accused persons because of some previous dispute between the parties, though nature of dispute etc. is not

stated in detail. However, a very pertinent statement appears on record viz., ""respectable persons have been trying for a compromise up till now,

which could not be finalized"". This becomes an important aspect. It appears that there have been some disputes which led to the aforesaid purported

attack by the accused on the complainant. In this context when we find that the elders of the village, including Sarpanch, intervened in the matter and

the parties have not only buried their hatchet but have decided to live peacefully in future, this becomes an important consideration. The evidence is

yet to be led in the Court. It has not even started. In view of compromise between parties, there is a minimal chance of the witnesses coming forward

in support of the prosecution case. Even though nature of injuries can still be established by producing the doctor as witness who conducted medical

examination, it may become difficult to prove as to who caused these injuries. The chances of conviction, therefore, appear to be remote. It would,

therefore, be unnecessary to drag these proceedings. We, taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, are of the opinion that the

compromise between the parties be accepted and the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 121 dated 14.7.2010 registered with Police Station

LOPOKE, District Amritsar Rural be quashed. We order accordingly.â€​

In the instant case, the offence under Section 279 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is non-compoundable under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973. The Petitioners No. 2 and 3 do not seek to pursue the prosecution having entered into a compromise with the Petitioner No.1. In the

said backdrop, as observed in then decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Narendra Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and Ors. (supra), the

possibility of conviction would indeed appear remote and trial would be an exercise in futility as the plausibility of witnesses appearing to depose are

distant.

Accordingly, considering the amicable settlement between the parties and on the anvil of the afore stated ratiocination and further, in the interest of

justice, the compromise between the parties is accepted. The FIR bearing No. 242/2017 dated 21.09.2017, before the Sadar Police Station and the

proceedings in G.R. Case No. 81 of 2018 (State of Sikkim vs. Devon Lepcha) pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, East

Sikkim at Gangtok, stand quashed.

Crl. M.C. No. 7 of 2018 stands disposed of.

Copy of this Order be sent to the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate, East Sikkim at Gangtok, for information.