IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-19633 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 23.10.2009 Ramandeep Singh ....Petitioner(s) vs. State of Punjab and another ....Respondent(s) *** CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH *** Present:- Mr.A.D.S.Sukhija, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab. *** AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner praying for quashing of FIR No.57 dated 5.6.2008 under Sections 304-A, 279, 337 and 338 IPC, registered at Police Station Ramdass, District Amritsar, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. The prayer for quashing is based upon the cancellation report which has been submitted by the prosecution in the FIR, which was submitted on the basis of the affidavit dated 25.6.2008 (Annexure P-7) given by Suraj Kumar son of Sh.Ram Saran, who is the complainant in the FIR, affidavit dated 25.6.2008 of Hari Krishan father of the deceased, Neeta @ Sunita widow of Ved Parkash deceased dated 25.6.2008, Rekha widow of late Jatinder Kumar dated 25.6.2008, Banarasi Dass son of Sh.Faqir Chand dated 25.6.2008, Pappu Lal Gurjar son of Narayan Ji dated 1.7.2008. It is contended that the affidavits clearly state that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner who was the driver of the offending vehicle Bolero with which the accident of the two deceased, namely, Ved Parkash son of Crl.Misc.No.M-19633 of 2009 (O&M) -2- Hari Krishan and Jatinder Kumar son of Des Raj took place. These affidavits have been submitted for consideration of the cancellation report. The said cancellation report was not accepted by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ajnala, on the ground that offence under Section 304-A IPC was not compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C., which has led to the filing of the present petition for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise so entered into between the parties. Counsel for the parties on the basis of the above submissions made in the petition contend that the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom deserve to be quashed. Counsel for the respondent-State has filed an affidavit in Court wherein the factum as asserted by the petitioner in his petition with regard to the submission of the affidavits by the persons stated above, has been accepted as also the submission of the cancellation report in the FIR. That apart, affidavit of Suraj Kumar son of Ram Saran-respondent No.2- complainant has been filed in Court. He is present in Court and has been identified by ASI Manjit Singh, Police Station Ramdass, District Amritsar. He states that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner and the accident took place all of a sudden because of the buffalos coming on the road. It has further been stated by him that he does not want to pursue the matter any further and has no objection if the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Neeta @ Sunita widow of Ved Parkash deceased has also filed an affidavit in Court and is present in person and has been duly identified by ASI Manjit Singh, Police Station Crl.Misc.No.M-19633 of 2009 (O&M) -3- Ramdass, District Amritsar. She reiterates what has been stated by Suraj Kumar son of Ram Saran. Rekha widow of Jatinder Kumar, who is also present in Court and has been identified by ASI Manjit Singh, Police Station Ramdass, District Amritsar, has filed her affidavit. She states that she does not want to pursue the matter any further and has no objection if the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances as well as the statements as have been made by the complainant and the widows of the two deceased and keeping in view the fact that they do not want to pursue the matter and do not hold the petitioner responsible for the sudden accident which had taken place, it would be in the interest of justice that the FIR and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. The Investigating Agency also has found the petitioner not guilty of the offence and, therefore, has submitted a cancellation report. The only reason given for non-acceptance of the cancellation report by the Magistrate is that the offence under Section 304-A IPC is not compoundable. Having gone through the records of the case and in view of the factual position as well as the statements of the complainant and Neeta @ Sunita and Rekha, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.57 dated 5.6.2008 under Sections 304-A, 279, 337 and 338 IPC, registered at Police Station Ramdass, District Amritsar and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. October 23, 2009 ( AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH ) poonam JUDGE