JUDGMENT : M.G. GIRATKAR, J. 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The criminal application is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The applicant Nos. 1 to 5 prayed to quash and set aside FIR No. 294/2017 registered by Police Station, Khaperkheda for the offences punishable under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code read with section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is submitted that the applicant No. 3 is the complainant. The applicant No. 1 is the wife of deceased Shravankumar S/o Lalsingh Kaureti. The applicant No. 2 is the father of deceased and the applicant No. 3 is the brother of deceased Shravankumar. The applicant No. 4 is the owner of vehicle/truck bearing No. MH31-AP-6718 and the applicant No. 5 is the driver of the said truck. 3. First Information Report came to be lodged against the applicant No. 5 on the report of the applicant No. 3. Brother of applicant No. 3, namely, Shravankumar and other labours were going by truck bearing No. MH31-AP-6718 from Sangam Jod. Suddenly, deceased Shravankumar fell down from the truck and sustained severe injury. He was immediately admitted to the Government Hospital. Doctor declared him dead. On the basis of the report of the applicant No. 3, crime was registered against the applicant No. 5. 4. It is submitted that the applicant No. 1 wife of deceased, the applicant No. 2 – father of deceased and the applicant No. 3 – brother of deceased are relatives of the applicant No. 4 who is owner of the truck bearing No. MH31-AP-6718. The applicants have settled their dispute amicably on 7-6-2017. The applicant Nos. 1 to 3 received compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- on account of accidental death of Shravankumar. It is submitted that offences are non-compoundable, therefore, it is prayed to quash and set aside FIR No. 294/2017. 5. Non-applicant-State filed reply and submitted that offence punishable under section 279 and 304-A of Indian Penal Code are non-compoundable and there is sufficient evidence against the applicant No. 5, hence, application is liable to be rejected. 6. Heard learned counsel Shri Giripunje for the applicants. He has submitted that the parties have settled their matter out of the Court. The applicant Nos. 1 to 3 received amount of compensation from the applicant Nos. 4 and 5. 6. Heard learned counsel Shri Giripunje for the applicants. He has submitted that the parties have settled their matter out of the Court. The applicant Nos. 1 to 3 received amount of compensation from the applicant Nos. 4 and 5. He has pointed out us settlement deed. Learned counsel pointed out decision in the case of Avinash Chawla vs. State and Anr. in Cri. M.C. No. 4942/2015 of the High Court of Delhi dated 4-12-2015. 7. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Shri Tembhare for the non-applicant. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 8. From perusal of FIR, it appears that accident took place due to application of jack. From perusal of FIR and registration of crime for the offence punishable under section 304-A of Indian Penal Code clearly shows that there was no any mens rea of the applicant No. 5. Suddenly, accident took place due to application of jack. 9. In the case of Avinash Chawla vs. State and Anr. (cited supra) it is held by Delhi High Court that: “7. Undisputedly, offence punishable under sections 279/304-A, Indian Penal Code are not compoundable, however, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in exercise of the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, this Court has power to accept the compromise. Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant..........” 10. In the present case, the applicant No. 1 who is wife, the applicant No. 2 who is father and the applicant No. 3 who is brother of deceased have settled their matter with the applicant Nos. 4 and 5. They have also received amount of compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/-. In view of the above cited judgment, we allow the criminal application in terms of prayer clause (B) and hereby quash and set aside FIR No. 294/2017 registered for the offences punishable under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code read with section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, registered in Police Station Khaperkheda, District Nagpur. Application allowed.