HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CRM(M) No.412/2024 1. Taj Din, Age 47 years S/o Sh. Shatto R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta District Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua 2. Ayub Khan, Age 5l years S/o Sh. Shatto R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta Dishict Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua 3. Liaqut Ali , Age 40 years S/o Sh. Shatto R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta District Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua 4. Babi, Age 36 years S/o Sh. Shatto R/o Chak Dhota Tehsil Hiranagar District Kathua 5. Tek Ali , Age 23 years S/o Sh. Taj Din R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta District Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua 6. Maskeen Ali , Age 19 years S/o Sh. Taj Din R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta District Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua 7. Shah Mohd. , Age 42 years S/o Sh. Elam Din R/o Bobey Tehsil Majalta District Udhampur at present Seotra Chak Tehsil Madeen District Kathua …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Munish Chopra, Advocate Vs 1. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, through S.H.O., Police Station Ramnagar District Udhampur. 2. Abdul Gani S/o Sh. Salam Din Caste Gujjar R/o Joffar Tehsil Ramnagar District Udhampur. 3. Parveen Begum D/o Sh. Abdul Gani Wo Tek Ali R/o Joffar Tehsil Ramnagar District Udhampur at present lodged at CCI, Parisha/ Nari Niketan, Udhampur. .…. Respondent(s) ….Proforma respondent Through: Mr. Sumeet Bhatia, GA for R-1 Mr.Sahil Sharma, Advocate for R-2 Mr. Naresh Kumar, Advocate for R-3 Sr. No.64 CRM(M) No.412/2024 2 Coram: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI, JUDGE ORDER 14.01.2025 01. Through the medium of instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners seek quashing of the FIR No.86/2023 dated 05.08.2023 registered with Police Station, Ramnagar, Udhampur at the behest of respondent No.2, for commission of offences under Sections 363/109 IPC as also charge sheet No.117/2023 arising out of the impugned FIR, which is pending before the learned JMIC, Ramnagar on various grounds. 02. It is stated that the proforma respondent No.3 and petitioner No.5 were in love with each other and they having attained the age of majority entered into a marriage agreement and solemnized marriage according to Muslim (Shariat) law in presence of witnesses on 19th August, 2023. According to the petitioners, on the instigation of some persons, respondent No.2 lodged a false and frivolous report with Police, which led to registration of the impugned FIR on 5th August, 2023. After registration of the FIRT, proforma respondent No.3 went to the Police Station and handed over adhar card, marriage agreement and nikahnama etc. Thereafter Radiology test of proforma respondent was got conducted from a private centre instead of government hospital to assess her age. When the proforma respondent No.3 was produced before the Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she refused to make any allegation of kidnapping and has deposed that she has married to petitioner No.5 of her own free will and volition and that she does not want to stay with her parents and presently she has been kept at Nari Niketan/ CCI Parisha, CRM(M) No.412/2024 3 Udhampur. Investigation into the impugned FIR culminated into filing of charge sheet No.117/2023 under Section 363/109 IPC, which is pending before the learned JMIC, Ramnagar. 03. During the pendency of the proceedings, respondent No.2 having realized his mistake and entered into a compromise/amicable settlement with petitioners . According to the compromise, respondent No.2 had to withdraw the impugned FIR, however, since offence under Section 363 IPC is not compoundable , as such, indulgence of this Court is sought to quash the impugned FIR and consequent proceedings arising out of the impugned FIR. In the terms of the agreement arrived at between the parties, they have decided to resolve the disputes and put an end to the litigation. 04. On 9th August, 2024, Registrar Judicial of this Court was directed to record the statements of petitioner Nos. 1 and 5 and respondent Nos. 2 and 3. On 15.10.2024, petitioner Nos.1 and 5 and respondent No.2 and 3 appeared before the Registrar Judicial of this Court and got their statements recorded which are placed on the record of the file. In terms of the statement of respondent No.2, on whose instance the impugned FIR was lodged, He has no grievance against the petitioners and that he does not want to pursue the impugned FIR filed by him. He has further stated that in view of the amicable settlement, he has no objection in case the impugned FIR and subsequent chargesheet is quashed. According to his statement, respondent No.3 is major being her date of birth 22.05.2005. In her statement, respondent No.3 has stated that she went to petitioner No.5 (Tek Ali) out of her own will and volition and married to him as per Muslim Law and intends to live and reside with her husband-Tak Ali. CRM(M) No.412/2024 4 05. The question, which arises for consideration is whether the FIR can be quashed on compromise between the parties, is no more res integra. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others, (2014) 6 SCC 466, framed guidelines for accepting the settlement for quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with criminal proceeding. Paragraph Nos. 29.3, 29.4 & 29.5 being relevant are reproduced below:- "29.03 Such a power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. 29.4 On the other, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves. 29.5 While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases." 06. In the present case also, the offence alleged against the petitioners does not fall within the offence of heinous nature and keeping in view the nature of the allegations and also considering the fact that the parties have already settled the matter and have agreed that respondent No. 4 shall have no objection if the impugned FIR and subsequent proceedings, if any, is quashed. It is also well settled that civil disputes as well as matrimonial dispute between private parties and criminal matter which have no grave effect, can be quashed on the basis of compromise. 07. In view of the compromise entered into between the parties, there are bleak chances of conviction and continuation of criminal proceedings will CRM(M) No.412/2024 5 cause grave injustice to the parties, as the parties are no longer interested in pursuing the same. 08. In view of the aforesaid discussion as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court to secure the ends of justice, this petition is allowed and FIR No.86/2023 registered at Police Station, Ramanagar, Udhampur alongwith consequent challan/charge-sheet No.117/2023 under Section 363/109 IPC titled UT of J&K v. Taj Din and others, pending before the JMIC, Ramnagar, is quashed. Proforma-respondent No.3, who is stated to be kept in CCI/Nari Niketan, Udhampur is directed to be set at liberty forthwith. She shall be free to live and reside as per her own will. 09. Disposed of along with all connected application(s). (Moksha Khajuria Kazmi) Judge Jammu 14.01.2025 Vinod, PS Whether order is speaking: Yes/No Whether order is reportable: Yes/No Vinod Kumar 2025.01.14 17.20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Jammu