Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes FIR in Road Accident Causing Death on Basis of Compromise; Holds Such Cases Not Heinous Per Se

Case Name: Tushar v. State of Haryana and Another
Citation: CRM-M-24616-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and quashed an FIR registered for offences under Sections 279, 304-A, and 337 IPC on the basis of a genuine compromise between the parties. The Court held that road accident cases resulting in death, in the absence of mens rea or mental depravity, cannot be treated as heinous offences, and continuation of criminal proceedings in such circumstances would serve no useful public purpose.

Summary: The petition arose from an FIR registered against the petitioner alleging rash and negligent driving resulting in a fatal road accident. During the pendency of proceedings, the parties amicably resolved the dispute and entered into a compromise. Pursuant to directions of the High Court, the parties appeared before the Illaqa Magistrate, who reported that the compromise was genuine, voluntary, and free from coercion, and that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents.

The High Court undertook a detailed examination of the scope of its inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS in light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir and Ramgopal. The Court distinguished offences involving accidents from heinous or serious crimes involving mental depravity, observing that accidents are often fortuitous incidents lacking criminal intent and cannot be equated with offences shocking to public conscience.

Emphasising that the possibility of conviction was remote due to the compromise and the complainant’s unwillingness to support the prosecution, the Court held that continuation of proceedings would result in futile waste of judicial time. The Court also noted mitigating factors such as the petitioner’s clean antecedents, young age, absence of premeditation, and the purely accidental nature of the incident.

Decision: The petition was allowed. The FIR and all consequential proceedings were quashed qua the petitioner on the basis of compromise, subject to payment of costs as directed by the Court.