1. cr appln 2719-10.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2719 OF 2010 Ramjeet Rambali Bhagat & Ano. .. Applicants Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ano. .. Respondents Mr. V.V. Purwant for the Applicants Mr. S.A. Shaikh, APP for the State Mr. M.S. Kumthekar for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J DATE : 9th SEPTEMBER, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard learned advocate for the applicants, learned advocate for respondent no. 2 and learned APP for the State. Two injured persons i.e Ramkes Bishwakarma and Jaychand Chauhan are present in person. 2 This application is filed by the applicants-original accused for quashing the FIR lodged under C.R. No. I-15 of 2009 with Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Ambernath (E). It is for the offence punishable under sections 304(A), 337 and 427 of IPC. It pertains to R.C.C. No. 2098 of 2009 which is pending before the learned J.M.F.C., Ulhasnagar. 1 1. cr appln 2719-10.doc 3. The prosecution case briefly stated is that the applicants are the directors of M/s. Indotherm Engineers Pvt Ltd. On 28th January 2009, an accident took place in their factory. There was a blast in the furnace due to which hot glass wool fall on the body of Dinanath Mourya son of Ramdas Mourya. Dinanath sustained injuries and he died. Two other persons i.e. Shri. Ramkesh R. Bishwakarma and Shri. Jaychand Dayaram Chauhan who were also working in the said factory sustained minor injuries in nature of abrasions while they were running away from the spot. 4. On the last occasion i.e on 3rd September 2010, Ramdas Mourya, father of Dinanath was present in the Court. He stated that he has been satisfactorily compensated by the applicants and the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and he has no objection if proceedings are quashed. He also tendered affidavit to above effect. 5. Learned advocate appearing for Ramdas Mourya and the two injured persons i.e Ramkes Bishwakarma and Jaychand Chauhan states that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and hence, the proceedings be quashed. So also, two injured persons i.e Ramkes and Jaychand who are present in the Court have stated that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and they have no 2 1. cr appln 2719-10.doc objection if proceedings are quashed. They have also tendered affidavit to the above effect. 6 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, it is observed as follows: "We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly over burdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law". In the said case, application was filed for quashing of FIR under various sections including 406 of IPC and on account of compromise entered into between the complainant and the accused, the said case came to be quashed. 3 1. cr appln 2719-10.doc 7 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Ors. reported in 1977 Cr.L.J. 1125 the Supreme Court referred to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and observed that in exercise of the wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The Supreme Court further observed that this power is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 8 Thus, in view of the above decisions and in view of the fact that there has been amicable settlement with all the aggrieved persons, I am inclined to quash the FIR and the proceedings relating thereto. 9 C.R. No.I-15 of 2009 of Shivaji Nagar Police Station, Ambernath (E) and the proceedings relating thereto i.e R.C.C. No. 2098 of 2009 pending before the learned JMFC, Ulhasnagar is quashed. 10 Application is disposed of in above terms. [SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] 4 1. cr appln 2719-10.doc 5