Sr. No. 173 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU c/w CRM(M) No.960/2024 CRM(M) No.1046/2025 Reserved on : 31.10.2025 Pronounced on: 11.12.2025 Whether the operative part or full judgment is pronounced: ___

1. Dr. Rubia ACR khter, Age 29 …..Petitioner(s)

years D/o Zainulab Din Choudhary R/o Haji Sultan Masjid Lane, Gulab Colony, Bhatindi, Jammu.

2. Shabnam Ara, Age 27 years D/o Zainulab Din Choudhary R/o Haji Sultan Masjid Lane, Gulab Colony, Bhatindi, Jammu.

Through: Mr. R. S. Parihar, Advocate in CRM(M) No.1028/2023 CRM(M) No.1046/2025 Mr. Sumit Moza, Advocate vice Mr. Amit Gupta, Sr. Advocate in CRM(M) No.960/2024 Vs

1. Union Territory of J&K through .…. Respondent(s)

Station House Officer, Women Cell Jammu.

2. Ruksar Choudhary D/o Bashir Ahmed R/o Near Police Station, Chander Kote, Ramban.

Through: Mr. Pawan Dev Singh, Dy. AG R-1.

in all the petitions.

Mr. K. S. Johal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Karman Singh Johal, Advocate for R-2.

in all the petitions.

(with clubbed matters)

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD. YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

1. Through the medium of the petitions CRM(M) No.1028/2023 and CRM(M) No.960/2024, filed under the provisions of Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanihita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as „BNSS‟ for short), the petitioners, who are alleged to have committed the offences under Sections 498-A, 109 IPC arising out of the FIR No.58/2023 dated 22.11.2023 registered with Police Station, Womens Cell Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, have sought the quashment of the said FIR on the main grounds that they have been involved in the FIR on the basis of a false and frivolous complaint in order to wreck vengeance. That the registration of the FIR is actually the result of giving a criminal colour to a private matrimonial dispute between the petitioners and the respondent No.2/complainant. That the registration of the FIR is the outcome of misuse and abuse of the process of law as the same has come into being without any prior verification on the part of the official respondent No.1 as was needed in the facts and circumstances of the case having regard to a matrimonial dispute between the private parties. That the quashment of the FIR shall meet the ends of justice.

It has now been mentioned in the third petition bearing CRM(M)

No.1046/2025 filed last in point of time that the private parties have now amicably settled the dispute that had led to the registration of the impugned case FIR.

2. The statements of the some of the petitioners and the respondent No.2/complainant stand already recorded by the Registry on 18.10.2025 in attestation of the mutual settlement between the private parties. The respondent No.2/complainant has stated on oath in her statement before the Registry that she has resolved her dispute with the petitioners, who were her in laws and her marriage with the petitioner-Tanveer Ahmed Choudhary stands dissolved mutually. She further deposed that a compromise deed dated 06.10.2025 stands also executed in between them. She has further deposed that she does not want to pursue the criminal proceedings against the petitioners/accused and sought for the quashment of the FIR that came to be registered on the basis of her complaint.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsels for the private parties in all the three petitions that since the private parties, who happen to be the accused/petitioners and the complainant/respondent No.2 in all the matters have amicably settled the matrimonial dispute therefore the quashment of the impugned FIR is likely to meet the ends of justice by facilitating petitioner-Tanveer Ahmed Choudhary (petitioner in CRM(M) No.1046/2025) and the respondent No.2/complainant (in all the three petitions) to settle their future life as per their own wishes. It was also submitted by the learned counsels that the offences under the FIR which are otherwise subject to proof are personal in nature relating to a matrimonial discord and are not having any social implications.

4. The learned coun