Sri. Harjeev Singh Chawla v. State of Karnataka

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 14380 OF 2026 BETWEEN:

SRI. HARJEEV SINGH CHAWLA, S/O SRI INDER RAJ SINGH CHAWLA, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/AT NO. 1104, SOBHA HRC PRISTINE, JAKKUR, BENGALURU 560 064. (SHOWN AS "HARJIV CHAWLA"/ACCUSED NO.1 IN THE FIR). …PETITIONER (BY SRI RAJATH, ADVOCATE) AND:

¶1STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY YELAHANKA TRAFFIC POLICE STATION, BENGALURU CITY - 560064, REPRESENTED BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU 560001.

¶2SMT. LAKSHMI, W/O SRI SAGAR GURAPPA MAGADUM, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, HOUSEWIFE, R/AT NO. 107, AVALAHALLI, SINGANAYAKANAHALLI, YELAHANKA, BENGALURU 560064. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI NAGHARISH G S, HCGP FOR R1, SRI DEXTOR COLARA, ADV. FOR R2)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.248/2026 OF YELAHANKA TRAFFIC FIRST CLASS (TRAFFIC COURT-III), BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-A DTD 13.09.2026, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCES P/U/S 281 AND 125(b) OF BNS 2023, IN SO FAR AS THE PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.R

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

ORAL ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2.

¶2Vakalath filed on behalf of respondent No.2 is taken on record.

¶3The learned HCGP accepts notice for respondent no.1.

¶4This petition is filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.248/2026 before Yelahanka Traffic Police Station. The offences alleged are under Section 281 and 125(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS).

¶5Learned counsel for the petitioner and second respondent jointly submit that the dispute between the parties

is amicably settled and an application is filed under Section 359 read with Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking permission of the Court to compound the offences and also to quash the proceedings.

¶6The application is also supported by the affidavit filed by the complainant and the petitioner.

¶7The complainant is also present along with the victim. The victim is the husband of the complainant. The victim has suffered a fracture of his collar bone.

¶8It is stated that the victim has undergone surgery and the medical expenses are borne by the petitioner. In addition, it is further submitted that Rs.40,000/- is paid to the victim towards the medical expenses that may be incurred by the victim in future.

¶9The Court has perused the contents of the application and the records produced.

¶10Prima facie, it is evident that the hospital expenses are borne by the petitioner. The complainant and the victim who are present before the Court jointly submit that they do not want to prosecute the criminal case relating to the accident

against the petitioner. However, the victim submits that he would seek compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶11The Court has noticed that the investigation is not yet completed. It is submitted that the vehicles involved in the accident have been inspected by the RTO.

¶12Under the circumstances, the Court is of the view that the victim can pursue his claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by producing the complaint and the FIR to establish the accident.

¶13In addition, it is also required to be observed that the petitioner before this Court shall not dispute the occurrence of the accident.

¶14It is also submitted that the vehicle is duly insured and the driver was possessing necessary driving licence at the time of alleged accident. In a claim petition, if filed, the insurer is at liberty to take such stand as advised in law.

¶15The cheque for Rs.60,883/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Kumara Park Branch is drawn in the name of Sagar Gurappa Magaduma, the victim and same is handed over to the victim.

¶16The Court is of the view that the criminal proceeding need not be proceeded against the petitioner as the complainant and victim are not willing to prosecute the matter.

¶17However, the right of the victim to claim compensation in accordance with law is not taken away. Same is kept intact.

¶18Hence, the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is allowed-in-part.

(ii) The proceedings in Crime No.248/2026 before Yelahanka Traffic Police Station is quashed.

(iii) However, it is made clear that FIR and the complaint which are already filed, and the vehicle inspection report, can be produced in evidence in a petition claiming compensation and shall be considered in evidence in accordance with law. The order allowing this petition shall not come in the way of considering the said evidence if it is otherwise admissible in law.

(iv) The victim is also permitted to avail the services of the Legal Services Authority, if he is otherwise eligible in law.

(v) The insurer is entitled to take such defence as available in law in case the petition is filed seeking compensation.

(ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE) JUDGE

CHS List No.: 3 Sl No.: 3