Court’s Decision: The Madras High Court allowed the petition to quash the FIR against the petitioner, finding it appropriate to exercise its quashing powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, given the voluntary settlement reached between the petitioner and the injured parties.
Facts of the Case: The case arose from an incident on September 12, 2024, where the petitioner allegedly collided with the second respondent’s two-wheeler on a highway. The collision occurred as the second respondent suddenly entered the main road from the side without signaling, causing injuries to himself and a third respondent who was also on a two-wheeler. The petitioner, a software engineer, assisted by calling for medical aid and later compensated both injured parties.
Issues: The primary issue before the court was whether the FIR, registered under Sections 281 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, should be quashed in light of the voluntary settlement and the lack of further interest from the complainants to pursue the matter.
Petitioner’s Arguments: The petitioner contended that the accident was not due to his negligence but was instead caused by the second respondent’s sudden entry onto the main road. Despite this, he had provided immediate assistance and compensation to the injured parties, who subsequently agreed to withdraw their complaint. The petitioner highlighted that the case’s pendency was adversely impacting his career, and he sought relief by having the FIR quashed.
Respondent’s Arguments: The prosecution acknowledged the petitioner’s role in the incident but noted that the injured parties were satisfied with the compensation received and were not interested in further proceedings. As such, the prosecution did not object to the quashing of the FIR.
Analysis of the Law: The court examined Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which allows for the quashing of proceedings in cases where a settlement has been reached, particularly when the incident appears to be of a non-serious nature and the parties have resolved the matter amicably. The court considered the judgment in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012), which provides guidance on the use of quashing powers when parties have reached a voluntary compromise.
Precedent Analysis: The court relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab to reinforce the discretionary power to quash proceedings under circumstances where it serves justice and respects the voluntary settlement between the parties.
Court’s Reasoning: The court emphasized that the petitioner’s immediate response and his willingness to compensate the injured parties demonstrated responsibility and goodwill. The court also noted that both respondents were content with the compensation and had not filed any further claims. This, combined with the absence of severe criminal elements in the case, led the court to conclude that the FIR’s continuation was unnecessary.
Conclusion: The court allowed the petition, quashing the FIR registered in Crime No.293 of 2024, and directed that the Memorandum of Compromise would form part of the order.
Implications: This ruling reinforces the applicability of Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing criminal proceedings in cases where a compromise has been reached between parties and no substantial public interest is compromised. This judgment serves as a precedent for similar cases, demonstrating judicial recognition of voluntary settlements in minor, non-serious offenses.
