AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ritu Bahri, J.—Notice of motion. On asking of the Court, Mr. Gurbir Sidhu, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the State.
At this stage, Ms. Anupama Takia, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 4.
Quashing of FIR No. 62 dated 8.5.2013 under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427 and 304-A IPC registered at Police Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P1) is being sought on the basis of compromise dated 20.7.2013 (Annexure P-2).
The FIR was got registered by respondent No. 2 with the allegations that one car bearing registration No. PB07-AC-4599 which was being driven by petitioner has hit against the cycle of Mohinder Singh, father of the complainant/respondent No. 2. Mohinder Singh received injuries and died after 13 days of the accident on 30.4.2013. As per the post-mortem report the cause of death was heart failure which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
After registration of the FIR and with the intervention of the respectables from both the sides, the legal heirs of Mohinder Singh i.e. Respondents No. 2 to 4 have entered into a compromise dated 20.7.2013 (Annexure P2).
As per the compromise, respondents No. 2 to 4 do not want to take any action against the petitioner-Ravi Kant and they shall not file claim in any Criminal or Civil Court.
On notice, respondents No. 2 to 4 have put in appearance and have been identified by their counsel. Their Identity Cards have also been produced in Court. She has tendered their affidavits to the effect that they have compromised the matter. A sum of Rs. 2 lacs has been given in cash to them by the petitioner as compensation and Rs. 65,000/- has been spent on treatment of Mohinder Singh when he was in hospital. They have no grievance against the petitioner and have no objection if the FIR in the present case is quashed.
The affidavits of the legal heirs of Mohinder Singh are taken on record as Annexure A1.
After going through the compromise (Annexure P2) and the affidavits, the Court is satisfied that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion.
Consequently, in view of the above circumstances and in view of the judgments of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Puttaswamy Vs. State of Karnataka and Another, and Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427 and 304-A IPC registered at Police Station Mahilpur, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P1) is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner. Petition is disposed of.