Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1503 (HP)

Naresh Rai v. State of H. P.

2015-10-14

P.S.RANA

body2015
ORDER: P.S.Rana, Judge. Present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing of FIR No.59 of 2013 registered in police station Dharampur District Solan H.P under sections 279,337 and 338 IPC and for quashing criminal proceedings in criminal case No. 38-2/2013 pending before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Solan District Solan HP. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE: 2. Amarjeet Markan son of Sh Ram Swaroop complainant filed FIR No. 59 dated 3.6.2013 under Sections 279,337 and 338 IPC. There is recital in FIR that on dated 3.6.2013 complainant namely Amarjeet Markan was driving his Car Alto K-10 No.CH-01AF-4187 and was approaching from Chandigarh to Solan and his driver was sitting in the back seat of Car. There is recital in FIR that at about 11.50 AM when he reached at bypass road Kumar Hatti near Galyana then from Solan side car having registration No. Skoda No. HR-01AF-5416 came in a fast speed in wrong direction and struck with the vehicle of complainant. There is further recital in FIR that car was damaged from one side and complainant sustained grievous injuries in his chest, neck and other parts of body. Matter was investigated and thereafter challan was filed in the Court. Learned trial Court framed charges against accused person under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC on dated 9.9.2014 and thereafter learned trial Court listed the case for prosecution evidence on dated 30.5.2015. Thereafter out of Court settlement was executed inter se the parties Annexure P2 placed on record. 3. Response also filed on behalf of co-respondent No.1 i.e. State of Himachal Pradesh. 4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioner and also perused entire record carefully. 5. Following points arise for determination in the present petition: 1. Whether petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC read with Article 227 of Constitution of India is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of petition? 2. Final order. Finding upon point No.1 with reasons. 6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner that out of court settlement has been executed inter se the parties Annexure P2 placed on record and on this ground petition be allowed is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. 2. Final order. Finding upon point No.1 with reasons. 6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner that out of court settlement has been executed inter se the parties Annexure P2 placed on record and on this ground petition be allowed is rejected being devoid of any force for the reasons hereinafter mentioned. Allegations against the petitioner are that petitioner has committed criminal offence under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC. Section 279 IPC deals with rash driving or riding on a public way. It is held that offence under Section 279 IPC is not between two private parties simpliciter but offence under Section 279 IPC is offence against the society at large because offence under Section 279 IPC is always committed on public way and general society has legal right to use public way without injury to their body or any property. It is well settled law that criminal proceedings should be quashed where offence is between private parties simpliciter. It is well settled law that where the offence is against the society at large then criminal proceedings should not be quashed while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.PC. There are serious allegations against the petitioner that petitioner had caused grievous hurt to complainant upon public way on dated 3.6.2013. In view of the above stated facts it is not expedient in the ends of justice to quash criminal proceedings filed against petitioner under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC being criminal offence against society at large relating to rash driving upon public way. In criminal offence under Section 279 IPC word public way is mentioned in positive manner hence it is held that criminal offence under Section 279 IPC falls within the definition of offence against public at large because criminal offence under Section 279 IPC is always committed upon public way. As per Article 141 Constitution of India law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court of India is binding upon all courts within the territory of India. See. 2015 (8) SCC 307 titled State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Manish and others. Also see 2012 (10) SCC 303 titled Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in negative against petitioner. Point No.2 Final order. 7. In view of finding on point No.1 petition filed under Section 482 Cr. 2015 (8) SCC 307 titled State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Manish and others. Also see 2012 (10) SCC 303 titled Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered in negative against petitioner. Point No.2 Final order. 7. In view of finding on point No.1 petition filed under Section 482 Cr. PC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India is dismissed. Observation made hereinabove is strictly for the purpose of deciding the present petition and shall not effect merits of the case in any manner. Record of learned trial Court along with certify copy of order be sent forthwith. Petitioner is directed to appear before learned trial Court on 6.11.2015. Petition filed under Section 482 Cr PC read with Article 227 of Constitution of India is disposed of. All pending application(s) if any also disposed of.