Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sukan Dass And Anr vs State And Ors on 16 March, 2021

Author: Yogesh Khanna

Bench: Yogesh Khanna

                                $~26
                                *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                +    W.P.(CRL) 297/2021
                                     SUKAN DASS AND ANR.                             ..... Petitioner
                                                     Through : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate
                                                               for P-1 Mr.C.M.Goyal, Advocate for
                                                               P-2.
                                                     versus
                                     STATE AND ORS.                               ..... Respondents
                                                     Through : Ms.Shivani Sharma, Mr. Surabhi
                                                               Katyal, Advocates for Ms.Richa
                                                               Kapoor, ASC for the State
                                                               with SI Ram Niwas, PS Mohan
                                                               Garden
                                                               Mr.Navin, Advocate for R-2 to 6

                                      CORAM:
                                      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
                                                         ORDER

% 16.03.2021

1. This petition is filed for quashing of the FIR No.652/2020 under Section 288/338/304A Indian Penal Code registered at police station Mohan Garden, Delhi against them and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. The brief facts are on 31.08.2020, an information of MLC No. 677/20 from Tarak Hospital, Dwarka More, New Delhi was received and this call was marked to SI Ramniwas for necessary action. He reached at Tarak Hospital and found injured Shiv Shankar S/o Siyaram Dass Age-35 Yrs has been admitted in the hospital vide MLC No. 677/20 and injured Puran S/o Hari Dass Age-19 Yrs vide MLC No. 678/20. The Investigating Officer collected the MLCs, viz. MLC No. 677/20 of injured Shankar S/o Siyaram with a/h/o fall from height and sustained head injury, grievous in nature. As per MLC No. 678/20 of injured Puran S/o Hari Dass, Dr. opined alleged/h/of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:19.03.2021 11:27 electric shock and nature of injury given was also grievous. Both of the injured were found unfit for statement. Investigating Officer made search of eye witnesses but no eye witness was found at that time. Investigating Officer reached the spot i.e. Plot No. 109, Gali No. 10, Vipin Garden Extension, New Delhi and it was revealed the building construction work was going on and owner and contractor didn't take any safety measures for the safety of labourers. It was revealed due to negligent act of owner as well as contractor, labourers Shankar and Puran got grievous injuries and hence FIR was registered.

3. During further investigation of the case Investigating Officer made a site plan of the incident and photographs were taken of the spot. On 02.09.2020, Investigating Officer interrogated accused contractor Sukan Dass S/o Sh. Bilal Dass and arrested the accused and then released him on bail. On 06.09.2020, an information regarding death of injured Shiv Shankar S/o Siya Ram was received from Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi at PS Mohan Garden. The Post Mortem of the dead body of deceased Shiv Shankar S/o Siyaram was conducted vide PM No. 1921/20 and as per post mortem report death was due to crania-cerebral damage as a result of injury sustained to head consequent to blunt force impact. All injuries were ante- mortem in nature and could be possible in the manner as alleged. Section 304A IPC was enacted in the case by the Investigating Officer.

4. On 14.09.2020, the Investigating Officer interrogated the owner of under construction building namely accused Kapil Sharma S/o Suresh Chand R/o C-69, Bhagwati Garden Extension, Uttam Nagar, N.D and during interrogation he told he had given the contract of building construction to accused Sukan Dass. After completion of the investigation charge sheet Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:19.03.2021 11:27 against accused Sukan Dass and Kapil Sharma was filed u/s 288/338/304A.

5. This petition is now filed on grounds of settlement between the legal heirs of deceased Shiv Shankar as also with injured Puran.

6. Legal heirs of Shiv Shankar and injured Puran were present in the Court and were identified by Investigating Officer and they all said they have received the compensation amount and have no further grievance against the contractor.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to an order dated 08.01.2021 in W.P.(Crl) No.1504/2020 titled Rahisuddin Madni V. Govt. NCT of Delhi Through Standing Counsel Criminal & Ors. wherein it was observed as under :

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also referred to W.P.(Crl.) No.550/2020 - Taranjeet Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors. wherein the following was held :

5. If one peruse the charge sheet one may find the only material public witnesses are the parents and grandfather of deceased. Since admittedly they have entered into a compromise hence framing of charge and examining them later to declare them hostile would only be a futile exercise.

6. In the circumstances, I see no impediment as to why such FIR cannot be quashed. In Kamal Kishore vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Cr.LM.c.3878/2019 decided on 22.01.2020, FIR under Section 304-A of IPC was quashed by this Court. Further in Babu Khan and Ors. Vs. State and Ors. In W.P.(CRL.) 2227/2019 decided on 05.09.2019, FIR under Section 288/304A of IPC was quashed. Further in C.R.R. No.1173/2018 Kolkata High Court had quashed a FIR under Section 304 (1) of IPC, registered under other sections too.

7. In Pankaj Bhardwaj and Ors. Vs. State and Ors.

The following was held:

"9. It is a well settled law that where the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and therefore do not affect public peace or tranquillity and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:19.03.2021 11:27 about peace and would secure ends of justice, it should not hesitate to quash them. In such cases, pursuing prosecution would be waste of time and energy. Non-compoundable offences are basically an obstruction in entering into compromise. In certain cases, the main offence is compoundable but the connected offences are not. In the case of B.S. Joshi and others v State of Haryana and another 2003 (4) SCC 675. The Hon'ble Apex Court observed that even though the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not apply to Such offences which are not compoundable, it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Hon' ble Apex Court laid down that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, section 320 Cr.PC. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. In the nutshell, the Hon'ble Apex Court justified the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice in view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, even where the offences were non compoundable."

8. I have also perused the statement of respondent No.6 Puran s/o Hari Dass who stated both the labourers - deceased and the injured - were taking an iron grill to the upper floor and while lifting it the iron grill touched a live wire of BSES passing near the first floor of premises and because of shock, both the injured persons fell and received severe injuries. It is argued both the injured were passing from near the live wire of BSES and hence it was for them to look after their own safety that they should not come in contact with such live wires passing through each of the house in that locality and hence the negligence, if any, was even contributory on the part of the labourers taking the iron grills upstairs.

9. It is further submitted the petitioners as also the respondent no.2 have now settled the matter amicably with the legal heirs of the deceased and with the injured Puran.

10. In lieu of settlement so arrived at, the respondent no.2 paid an amount of Rs. 5 lakh to the legal heirs of deceased namely Shiv Shankar Das and the settlement agreement of the petitioner with injured Puran, respondent no.6 is also shown today in court and be placed on record in the course of the day.

11. Since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, the respondents have no intention to pursue the matter further and as the offence is personal in nature and does not affect public peace; the chance of conviction being bleak, hence to bring the peace to the minds of the family members of the deceased/injured to continue the matter further would be a sheer waste of time.

12. Hence the FIR No.652/2020 under Section 288/338/304A Indian Penal Code registered at police station Mohan Garden against them along with the proceedings emanating therefrom stands quashed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

MARCH 16, 2021 NEHA Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRADEEP SHARMA Signing Date:19.03.2021 11:27