'Only He Was Injured In Road Accident, Offence Not Against Society': HP High Court Quashes Rash Driving Case Against Advocate

Justice Sushil Kukreja observed that only the petitioner had been injured in the accident and there were no other casualties, thereby disqualifying it as an offence committed against society at large. 

“The allegations made in the FIR, even if accepted at their face value, do not prima facie constitute any offence against the petitioner. It is not in dispute that no other person, except the petitioner himself, had sustained injury in the aforesaid accident, as such, the allegations cannot be construed to be in the nature of an offence alleged to have been committed against the Society at large”.

The petitioner had approached the Court seeking to quash the FIR registered against him at Police Station Dharampur, District Solan under Sections 279 and 337 of the IPC. The case stemmed from a minor road accident on the night of 29th June 2022 where no one was injured.

The petitioner, a young advocate, explained that the accident occurred due to the slippery road conditions on a hilly route, leading to a collision with a parapet. He was injured but there were no other casualties. He submitted that on 30.06.2022, the respondent, in undue haste and mechanical manner, without having complete knowledge of the facts lodged an FIR under Sections 279 and 337 of IPC and that the FIR was filed without proper investigation, and the petitioner asserted that there was no evidence to suggest he was driving recklessly.

The State contested the petitioner's claims, arguing that the accident was a result of the petitioner's rash and negligent driving. They asserted that the injuries sustained by the petitioner were severe, leading to his critical condition and subsequent treatment at medical facilities in Chandigarh.

Justice Kukreja, after hearing arguments from both parties, referenced the Supreme Court judgment in M/S Neeharika Infrastructure Ltd. v State of Maharashtra & Ors (2021). and emphasised the need to prevent the abuse of the legal process and to secure the ends of justice.

On scrutiny of the available record, the court concluded that the offence alleged against the petitioner was of a personal nature and did not constitute a crime against society. Justice Kukreja highlighted that, even if the allegations were accepted at face value, they did not prima facie constitute an offence.

The bench ruled that since no other person, apart from the petitioner himself, was injured in the accident continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the legal process.

"The offence is of personal nature; therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings against the petitioner/accused."

In light of the facts and circumstances surrounding the case, the court allowed the petition. Consequently, the FIR and the corresponding proceedings were quashed and set aside.

Case Title: Abhishek Arora Vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 71

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment