CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Page 1 of 5 Serial No.09 Regular List IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR. CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Salil Kumar Arora & Ors. ….. Petitioner(s) Through: - Mr. Farhan Mirza, Advocate. V/s Javaid Ahmed Kumar. ….. Respondent(s) Through: - Mr. Iman Showkat and Arfat Rashid, Advocates. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE O R D E R 28.08.2025. 1. Upon coming up instant petition for consideration, the counsel for the petitioners would submit that an amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs has been deposited before the Registry of this Court pursuant to the order dated 27th December, 2023, and that in respect of the said amount, coupled with other pleas, the respondent herein have had filed a criminal complaint before the CJM, Shopian against the petitioners herein, alleging therein the commission of offence punishable under Sections 409,402 and 506 IPC on the ground that the accused/petitioners herein have had approached the complainant/respondent herein at his office in Shopian and introduced themselves as the authorized Maruti Suzuki Dealers, stationed at Batala-Road, Amritsar-Punjab and entered into a deal for sale of vehicles/cars in furtherance whereof the complainant/respondent herein paid an amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs to the accused/petitioners herein through RTGS against the purchase of SWIFT-ZXI Plus car, however, despite receiving the said amount, CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Page 2 of 5 the accused/petitioners herein failed to fulfill their promise, qua the delivery of the vehicle or else repay the said amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs with interest to the complainant/respondent herein, thus committed the offences in question. 2. The counsel for the petitioner would also submit that after taking cognizance of the offences therein the said complaint, CJM issued warrants of arrest against the accused/petitioners herein on 29.12.2023, whereafter the petitioners herein challenged the said compliant on 16th December, 2023, through the medium of instant petition and while considering the same at its threshold the accused/petitioners came to be directed by this Court to deposit an amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs before the Registry by way of a demand draft and subject to the depositing of which the proceedings of the complaint as also warrants of arrest issued against the accused/petitioners herein were to be stay. 3. Counsel for the petitioners herein would submit that the said amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs was deposited before this Court and that same may be released in favour of the complainant/respondent herein under an amicable settlement arrived at with the complainant/respondent herein who has agreed to withdraw the impugned complaint or else have the said complaint settled by this Court on the basis of said settlement. 4. On the other hand counsel for the complainant/respondent herein acknowledges and admits to the aforesaid submission of the counsel for the petitioners. CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Page 3 of 5 5. Having regard to the aforesaid position obtaining in the matter inasmuch, as the case setup in the impugned complaint as also the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another” reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303” the instant petition is taken up for final disposal at this stage with the consent of counsel for the parties. 6. However, before proceedings further in the matter it would be appropriate to refer to the following paras of the judgment supra. “The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarized thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Page 4 of 5 have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is CRM(M) No. 744/2023 Page 5 of 5 in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding”. 7. In view of the aforesaid position of law inasmuch as, what has been observed above, the instant petition is disposed of and the impugned complaint No. 1708/2023, pending before the court of CJM Shopian as also the proceedings initiated thereon including the order dated 16.12.2023, shall be deemed to have been quashed, as a consequence whereof, Registry is directed to release the amount of Rs. 8.00 lacs deposited by the accused/petitioners before the Registry of this Court pursuant to the order dated 27th December, 2023, in favour of the complainant/respondent herein along with interest, if any, accrued thereon after his proper verification and identification. 8. Disposed of. 9. Registry to send a copy of this order to the court Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shopian. (Javed Iqbal Wani) SRINAGAR Judge 28.08.2025 “Abdul Rashid” Whether the order is speaking? Yes/No Whether approved for reporting? Yes/No Abdul Rashid Ganaie I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document :02.09.2025 16:02