Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
Tawfeeq Ahmad Ganaie vs Ut Of J&K & Ors on 5 May, 2025
Author: Sanjay Dhar
Bench: Sanjay Dhar
Sr. No.87
Regular List
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
Page |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.
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.
Page |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
Page |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
