CRM No.M 16636 of 2010 # 1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No.M 16636 of 2010 Date of Decision:-28.07.2010 Inderpal Singh. ......Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab & Anr. ......Respondents. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- Mr. Paramjit Singh Saini, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab. *** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Crl. Misc.No.29826 of 2010 Application seeking exemption from filing certified copies of Annexures P-1 to P-3 and detailed affidavit is allowed as prayed for. Crl. Misc.No.M-16636 of 2010 Prayer is under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing of FIR No.45 dated 25.04.2010 under Section 279, 304-A, 427 Indian Penal CRM No.M 16636 of 2010 # 2# Code registered with Police Station Dehlon, District Ludhiana on the basis of compromise(P-2). The allegations against the petitioner is that he while driving his Zen Car struck the motor cycle of the deceased Amarjit Singh from behind and caused caused accident which resulted into his death. The complainant is the son of the deceased Amarjit. It is submitted that the parties had arrived at the compromise, therefore, the FIR be quashed. Learned State counsel has opposed the prayer. It would be apposite to notice two judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In Dalbir Singh Vs. State of Haryana 2000(5) SCC 82 it was held that the criminal courts cannot treat the nature of offence under Section 304-A IPC as attracting the benevolent provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act due to galloping trends for roadside accident in India and their devastating consequences visiting the victims and their families. One of the consideration while imposing sentence should be deterrence and the callous drivers of vehicles should always bear in mind that they cannot escape from jail sentence. Similar view was reiterated in B Nagabhushanam Vs. State of Karnataka 2008 (5) SCC 730 stating that no leniency can be shown to the rash and negligent drivers causing the death. Keeping in view the aforesaid mandate of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the facts of the present case I am unable to accept the plea of the petitioner for quashing of the FIR of a non CRM No.M 16636 of 2010 # 3# compoundable offence. Dismissed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE 28th July, 2010 Vinay