1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SUBJECT : Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Crl. M.C. No. 6667-10/2006
Date of Decision: 2nd January, 2008
Braham Prakash and Ors.
.....Petitioners
Through Mr. B.R. Handa, Senior Advocate
with Ms. Hiteshi Arora
versus
The State of NCT of Delhi ....Respondent
Through Mr. Sanjay Lao, APP for the State.
P.K.BHASIN, J:
1. The petitioners, by way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 are praying for quashing of the FIR no. 95/2006 for the
offence under Section 308/34 of Indian Penal Code ( I.P.C. in short) registered at
Police Station Kanjhawala on 13.07.2006.
2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that on 13.07.2006 at about 1.45 p.m.
petitioners no. 1-3 gave beatings to one Narender, petitioner no.4 herein, and in
respect of that incident FIR under Section 308/34 I.P.C. was registered on the basis
of the statement of the injured Narender who named Braham Prakash, petitioner
no. 1, and his two sons, petitioners no. 2 and 3 herein, as the assailants.
3. During the pendency of the investigation, both the parties who are related to
each other, with the intervention of the respectable persons of their village resolved
their disputes and arrived at an amicable settlement and in view of the compromise
this joint petition was filed by the accused and the injured- complainant for
quashing of the above-referred FIR. Copy of the compromise deed signed by both
the parties has also been placed on record.
4. Notice of the petition was given to the State. Learned APP for the State opposed
quashing of the FIR on the ground that offence under Section 308 I.P.C. is of grave
2. nature and the same is not compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C. and so FIR
should not be quashed. In reply to this objection learned senior counsel for the
petitioners had submitted that this Court has been quashing cases even in respect of
offence under Section 307 I.P.C. where the parties had reported settlement.
5. It is now well settled that even in respect of those offences which are not
compoundable FIRs/criminal proceedings can be quashed if the Court while
dealing with a petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. feels that it would secure the ends
of justice and continuation of the investigation/criminal trial would amount to
abuse of the process of law. Reference in this regard can be made to one judgment
of the Hon ble Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and Ors. Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.
, AIR 2003 SC 1386 where it has been so held. Further, in a recent case decided by
this Court reported as Basara and Ors. v. State and Anr. Crl. M.C. No. 6621-
24/2006 and in an earlier judgment also of this Court in Gurcharan Singh v. The
State and Anr. , 1998 Cri.l.J. 3780, the proceedings pending in the Court even for
the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. were quashed in view of the
compromise between the parties. So, since both the parties in the present case are
related to each other and are neighbours also and they have settled their disputes
for bringing about peace and harmony in their families no fruitful purpose would
be served if the investigation against the accused persons goes on and the relief of
quashing of the FIR in these circumstances cannot be refused just because Section
308 I.P.C. is involved in the case.
6. In view of the foregoing and considering the fact that this Court itself in its
earlier decisions, as noted above, has been allowing petitions for quashing of the
FIRs on the basis of the settlement between the parties even in cases where
allegations of serious nature inviting punishment upto imprisonment for life were
levelled against the accused, I am inclined to allow this petition. Consequently FIR
no. 95/2006 registered at Police Station Khanjhawala on 13-07-2006 is hereby
quashed.
Sd/-
P.K.BHASIN,J
