Sr. No.87 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU CrlM No. 1391/2023 Huzoor Fatma & O rs …..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Arshid Pervaiz Malik, Advocate Vs UT of J&K & Ors .…. Respondent(s)

Through: Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, GA for R-1&2 Mr. Abrar Ahmed Khan, Adv for R-3 Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD. YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE

ORDER

19.12.2025

1. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners and the respondent No.3 who happen to be the accused and the complainant respectively in the impugned case FIR have mutually settled the dispute that had led to the registration of the impugned case FIR No. 0132/2023 dated 17.08.2023 under Sections 452, 427, 147 IPC of Police Station, Poonch. It is submitted that the petitioners and respondent No.3 are neighbours hailing from the same area. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that it may meet the ends of justice in case the instant petition is allowed and the impugned case FIR is quashed as the same shall facilitate the cordial relation between the private parties being neighbours.

2. The petitioners/accused and the respondent No.3/complainant present in person admitted that they have mutually settled the dispute and have been living cordially as neighbours.

3. The Registry is directed to record the statements of the petitioners and respondent No.3/complainant upon their identification in attestation of their mutual settlement.

4. The learned counsel for the official respondents/UT, however, submitted that the matter may be dealt with in accordance with the law notwithstanding the mutual settlement between the private parties. He submitted that the FIR sought to be quashed stands registered under serious offences against the petitioners/accused. He further submitted that the said offences are not compoundable under law and, as such, the quashment of the impugned FIR is likely to cause the miscarriage of justice by encouraging the criminal.

5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it may meet the ends of justice in case the instant petition is allowed and the impugned case FIR bearing No. 0132/2023 dated 17.08.2023 under Sections 452, 427, 147 IPC of Police Station, Poonch is quashed as the same shall really facilitate the restoration of the cordial relation between the private parties being neighbours.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. This Court in its opinion feels fortified with an authoritative judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court cited as “Gopal Kumar B. Nar Vs. CBI (2014) 5 SCC 800” in which it has been held that “though quashment of non compoundable offence under Section 482 CrPC, following a settlement between the parties would not amount to circumvention of Section 320, but such power has to be exercised with care and caution and would depend on facts of each case.”

9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in “Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors vs State of Gujarat and Anr. (2017) 9 SCC 641” has considered the aspect of the invocation of the inherent powers by the High Courts under Section 528 of the BNSS corresponding to