Sr. No. 133

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT JAMMU

Gurbaksh Singh …..Petitioner(s)

Through: Mr. Mohit Gupta, Advocate

Vs

UT of J&K Th SHO Incharge Police .…. Respondent(s)

Station Satwari and others

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

Respondent No.2-Present in person

None for R-3

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

ORDER

29.12.2025

(Oral)

1. Heard.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner

and the respondent No.2, who are husband and wife living together peacefully since years have already settled their matrimonial dispute that had led to the registration of the impugned case FIR bearing No.138/2019 dated 10.07.2019 of Police Station, Satwari, Jammu under Sections 498A, 308, 109 RPC and the filing of the subsequent charge-sheet titled „State vs Gurbaksh Singh and others‟ pending trial in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu. It is submitted that the proforma respondent No.3 is the mother of the petitioner and the mother-in-law of the respondent No.2, who was arrayed as co-accused in the FIR as well as

the charge-sheet.

3. The petitioner/accused and the respondent No.2/complainant, who are

present in the open Court have testified the fact of their having already settled the matrimonial dispute and submitted that they are peacefully

living their matrimonial life and have been blessed by the God with a child. They submitted that the respondent No.3 is their mother who also figures as co-accused in the charge-sheet.

4. Through the medium of the instant petition filed under the provisions of Section 528 BNSS, the petitioner has sought the quashment of the criminal challan titled „State vs Gurbaksh Singh and others‟, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu under Sections 498A, 308, 109 RPC against the petitioner and the proforma respondent No.3 on the main ground that the private parties have amicably settled the matrimonial dispute.

5. The learned counsel for the respondent No.1 however submitted that matter may be dealt with in accordance with law, notwithstanding the mutual settlement between the parties.

6. In the facts and the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that it may meet the ends of justice, in case, the petition is allowed and the impugned charge-sheet titled „State vs Gurbaksh Singh and others‟ arising out of the impugned case FIR bearing No.138/2019 dated 10.07.2019 of Police Station, Satwari, Jammu under Sections 498A, 308, 109 RPC is quashed, as the same shall facilitate the petitioners and respondent No.2 to maintain a cordial and peaceful conjugal house.

7. Let the statements of petitioner and the respondent No.2 be recorded by the learned Registrar Judicial in support of their mutual settlement.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10.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 w