Sr. No. 212 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CrlM No. 336/2025 Mudasser Hussain .....Petitioner(s)

Through :- Mr. Mohd Latif Malik, Advocate v/s UT of J&K & Ors .....Respondent(s)

Through :- Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, GA for R-1 to 6 Respondent No.7 present in person CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE

ORDER

08.12.2025

1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the private parties i.e the petitioner/accused and the respondent No.7/complainant have already amicably settled their dispute that had led to the registration of the impugned FIR bearing No.06/2021 dated 14.02.2021 of Police Station Gool, District Ramban. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the private parties are neighbours as well as relatives and their mutual settlement has been arrived at by the intervention of the common relatives and the elders. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that the quashment of the impugned FIR shall meet the ends of justice by facilitating future cordial relation between the private parties.

2. Through the medium of the instant petition filed under the provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973[already repealed but applicable in the case and hereinafter referred as “the Code” for short corresponding to Section 528 of BNSS], the petitioners have sought the quashment of the impugned case FIR No. 06/2021 dated 14.02.2021, registered with the Police Station, Gool, District Ramban under Sections 307, 452, 147, 323, 336 IPC on the main grounds that same has been falsely and frivolously registered on the basis of a non-factual complaint. That the petitioners are members of the same family who have been intentionally impleaded in the case by the complainant to wreck vengeance.

3. The petitioner and the respondent No.7/complainant present in the Court submitted that they have already settled their dispute amicably and have been living cordially as neighbours and relatives. That the alleged injured namely Mohd Ashraf son of respondent No.7/complainant is also present in person, who also supported the fact of the compromise between them.

4. The petitioners and respondent No.7/complainant are directed to get their statements recorded in attestation of their mutual settlement before the learned Registrar Judicial of this Court.

5. The learned appearing counsel for the official respondents 1 to 6, however, submitted that the matter may be dealt with in accordance with law notwithstanding the amicable settlement between the private parties, so that no miscarriage of justice takes place by encouraging of the criminals.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it may meet the ends of justice in case the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR bearing No. 06/2021 dated 14.02.2021 of Police Station Gool, District Ramban is quashed as the same shall facilitate the future cordial relation between the private parties being neighbours as well as relatives.

7. Although this Court is of the opinion that an FIR cannot be generally and in routine manner allowed to be quashed in exercise of the powers under Section 528 of BNSS corresponding to Section 482 of the Code on the main ground that the parties have settled their controversy that had become the cause of occurrence, yet exceptional ground appears to be made out in the opinion of the Court, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, for invoking its extraordinary powers under Section 528 of BNSS to quash the FIR in question.

8. The provisions of Section 359 of the BNSS corresponding to Section 320 of the Code do not restrict but limit and circumvent the powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS corresponding to Section 482 of the Code regarding quashment of FIR’s and criminal proceedings for the sake of the society at large which is real beneficiary of the criminal justice delivery system.

9. This Court in its opinion feels fortified with an authoritative judgm