Libertatem Magazine

Compromise Between Parties In Case Of Death By Rash And Negligent Driving Is Not A Ground To Quash The Offence u/s 304-A IPC

Contents of this Page

In Mohammed Ashraf v State of Kerala, 2016 (Order dated May 18 2016) the High Court of Kerala held that an offence of death, resulting from rash driving caused by drunken, negligent or adventurous drivers cannot be quashed based on the compromise subsequently entered between the parties. The facts of the case were that an incident occurred on 11/12/2011 at around 4:30 pm when the petitioner drove his vehicle in rash and negligent manner and met with an accident with a bike which was being driven by the respondent number 3. The 3rd respondent’s father suffered grave injuries and a result of it died. The parties later settled the dispute in this regard in mediation and approached the Hon’ble Court to quash the proceedings thereto.

Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan, observed that, the nature of offence U/s 304 A committed by the accused/petitioner were not personal or private, in nature, which could be settled based on compromise between the parties. Hence the said offence could not be quashed by exercising the inherent power of the court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court noted that taking a lenient view for an offence under Section 304A of IPC, will leave a wrong impression about the criminal justice system and will encourage further criminal acts.

About the Author