HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CRM(M) No.563/2024 TAWFEEQ AHMAD GANAIE ... PETITIONER(S) Through: - Mr. Mubashir Vikar, Advocate. Vs. UT OF J&K & ORS. …RESPONDENT(S) Through: - None for R1 & R2. Mr. Shah Ashiq Hussain, Adv-for R3. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE ORDER (ORAL) 05.05.2025 1) The petitioner, through the medium of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C, has challenged the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.09/2023 for offences under Section 498A, 323 and 506 IPC registered with women’s Police Station, Kupwara, which are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Munsiff), Sogam Kupwara. 2) As per the contents of the FIR, on 02.04.2023, the complainant (respondent No.3) lodged a written report with the police, alleging therein that while she was sitting at her home, the accused (petitioner herein), entered into the house and without any reason started severely abusing and beating her and dragged her by her hair. It was further alleged that the accused from time to time demanded dowry from her. On Sr. No.87 Regular List P a g e | 2 the basis of this report, the impugned FIR was registered and investigation was set into motion. After investigation of the case, offences under Sections 498-A, 323 and 506 of IPC were found established against the accused and the challan was accordingly laid before the trial court. 3) It seems that during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties have entered into a compromise on 17.08.2024. In support of the compromise, the statements of petitioner and respondent No.3 (complainant) have been recorded by the Registrar Judicial on 04.04.2025, wherein they have stated that they have amicably settled their dispute and that they have no grievance against each other. Complainant/respondent No.3 has stated that she does not want to pursue the criminal proceedings against the accused. 4) It is in the above circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings emanating from the aforesaid FIR. 5) Heard and considered. 6) So far as the fact pertaining to the compromise arrived at between the parties, is concerned, the same is not in dispute. The question arises as to whether this Court has power to quash the proceedings. P a g e | 3 7) It is a settled law that the offences arising out of the disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature or the disputes arise out of matrimony and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the High Court will be within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings, particularly when, as a consequence of the compromise arrived at between the parties, there is remote possibility of securing conviction of the accused. In my aforesaid view, I am fortified by the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Anil Mishra vs. State of UP & Ors, (2024) 3 SCR 385, K. Bharathi Devi vs. The State of Telengana (SLP (Criminal) No.4353 of 2018 decided on 3rd October, 2024), Gian Singh. v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & anr, (2014) 6 SCC 466. 8) Adverting to the facts of the instant case, it is clear that the parties have entered into a compromise wherein the complainant has categorically stated that she is not willing to pursue the criminal proceedings and that the parties have settled their disputes amicably. It is also clear that the offences alleged against the petitioner exclusively arise out of matrimonial dispute between him and the complainant. In these circumstances, if an end is not put to the criminal proceedings, it would amount to giving a fresh lease of life to the dispute which has been settled by parties amicably. It will amount to frittering away of the fruits of compromise that has P a g e | 4 been arrived at between the parties. The continuance of criminal proceedings against the accused/petitioner in these circumstances, will be nothing but an abuse of process of law. 9) For the foregoing discussion, the petition is allowed and FIR No.09/2023 for offences under Section 498A, 323 and 506 IPC registered with women’s Police Station, Kupwara, and the proceedings emanating therefrom, which are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (Munsiff), Sogam Kupwara, are quashed. (Sanjay Dhar) Judge Srinagar 05.05.2025 “Bhat Altaf-Secy” Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No Mohammad Altaf Bhat I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 07.05.2025 03:05