AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard learned Counsel in both the applications.
Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of non-applicant No.1-State in both the applications. Advocate Mr. C.A. Ranadive and Advocate Ms. Sangeeta Das holding for Advocate Ms. Priya Rathi, waives service of notice on behalf of non-applicant Nos.2 and 3, respectively in both the applications.
Both the applications filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNSS”), arise out of the same incident, wherein the First Information Report (for short, “FIR”) and the counter FIR came to be lodged.
In Criminal Application No.2030 of 2026, applicant i.e. Jaysingh Tugeram Sori, seeks quashing of FIR bearing Crime No.0543 of 2026, registered with Bramhapuri Police Station, Dist. Chandrapur, for the offences punishable under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, “MV Act”) and Sections 281 and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”), along with all consequential proceedings, on grounds of execution of Settlement Deed. Whereas in Criminal Application No.2024 of 2026, applicant i.e. Mangal Vitthal Pardhi, seeks quashing of FIR bearing Crime No.0544 of 2026, registered with Bramhapuri Police Station, Dist. Chandrapur, for the offences punishable under Section 184 of the MV Act and Sections 281 and 125(b) of the BNS, along with all consequential proceedings, on grounds of execution of Settlement Deed. Therefore, both the applications are disposed of by this common order.
The brief facts of the case are as follows :
Perusal of both the FIRs indicates that on 23.06.2026, Jaysingh Sori was riding a HF Delux two wheeler motorcycle bearing registration No. MH-34-BN-9938. Whereas, Mangal Pardhi was riding a Honda Unicorn two wheeler Motorcycle bearing registration No. MH-34-CM-9513. In front of Wanjari Hospital, Bramhapuri, both the vehicles collided with each other, wherein riders of both the vehicles i.e. Jaysingh Sori and Mangal Pardhi, got injured and they were taken to the hospital. Therefore, the father of applicant Mangal Pardhi lodged the complaint against the applicant Jaysingh Sori. Whereas, one Neelkant Bagmare lodged the complaint against the applicant Mangal Pardhi, as a counter FIR. The concerned police station registered an offence under Section 184 of the MV Act and Sections 281 and 125(b) of the BNS, against each other. Thus, it is a case of a FIR and a counter FIR for the same incident on the allegations of riding the vehicles in a rash and negligent manner.
The applications for quashing the FIR has been filed on account of settlement between the parties. The complainant in each application has filed an affidavit stating therein that the matter is amicably settled between the parties. Therefore, they do not want to proceed with the litigation against each other and they have no objection if both the FIRs are quashed and set-aside against the applicant in each case. The complainant in each case is physically present before this Court. They are duly identified by learned Counsel. They reiterated the contents of the affidavit and submitted that they have no objection if both the FIRs are quashed and set-aside.
A reference can be made to the case of Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, [(2014) 6 SCC 466], wherein the Supreme Court has observed as under :
“29.1.Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
29.2.When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure :
(i)ends of justice, or
(ii)to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. ….. …..
29.5.While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.”
The dispute has been arisen out of a motor vehicle accident, where both the parties have suffered injuries and now they do not want to proceed ahead with prosecution against each other. The applicant in both the applications are from same village and therefore, to maintain harmony and peaceful relations between themselves, they decided not to proceed against each other. In that scenario, there is a very bleak chance of the trial to culminate into conviction. Therefore, the continuation of proceedings against the applicant in each application would be nothing but a futile exercise. Therefore, a case is made out for exercising inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS to quash the FIR and the counter FIR, lodged by the parties against each other. Hence, the following order is passed.
ORDER
Application No.2030 of 2026 and Application No.2024 of 2026 are allowed.
ii) The First Information Report vide Crime No.0543 of 2026, registered with Bramhapuri Police Station, Dist. Chandrapur, for the offences punishable under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Sections 281 and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stand quashed and set-aside qua the applicant viz. Jaysingh Tugeram Sori.
iii) The First Information Report vide No.0544 of 2026, registered with Bramhapuri Police Station, Dist. Chandrapur, for the offences punishable under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Sections 281 and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stand quashed and set-aside qua the applicant viz. Mangal Vitthal Pardhi.
iv) Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.