HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M) No. 118/2026 Reserved on: 20.04.2026 Pronounced on: 28.04.2026 Uploaded on: 28.04.2026 Whethertheoperativepartorfull Judgmentispronounced:Full Riyaz Ahmad Wani age 52 years s/o Gh. Rasool Wani …Petitioner(s)

R/o Tragpora Rafiabad, Baramulla Through: Mr.ParvaizNazir,Advocate Vs.

Abdul Hamid Dar ...Respondent(s)

S/o Sajad Ahmad Dar R/o Haigam Sopore Baramulla Through: None CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE.

JUDGEMENT

BRIEF FACTS:

01. The petitioner has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, calling in question the Lok Adalat Award dated 08.03.2025 passed in File No. 192 titled Abdul Hamid Dar vs Riyaz Ahmad Wani and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

02. It emerges from the record that the respondent/complainant instituted a criminal complaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sopore. The complaint was founded on two cheques bearing Nos. 426904 dated 01.06.2024 and 426905 dated 02.08.2024, each for an amount of ₹50,000/-, drawn in favour of the complainant and maintained at J&K Bank Branch, Baramulla. The said cheques, upon presentation, came to be dishonoured with the remarks “Funds Insufficient and Alterations require drawer’s attention,” as reflected in the return memos dated 11.07.2024 and 02.08.2024.

03. The material on record further reveals that the complainant had business dealings with the brother of the petitioner, who had allegedly taken an advance amount of ₹4,50,000/- from the complainant in connection with supply of apple boxes, which transaction did not fructify. It is stated that the petitioner thereafter undertook to discharge the liability of his brother and, in furtherance thereof, issued the aforesaid cheques in favour of the complainant. Upon dishonour of the cheques and alleged failure to make payment within the statutory period despite issuance of demand notice, the complaint under Section

138 NI Act came to be filed.

04. Upon issuance of process, the petitioner appeared before the learned Magistrate, and his statement under Section 251 Code of Criminal Procedure was recorded on 11.02.2025. In the said statement, the petitioner acknowledged the cheque amount, while asserting that the liability pertained to his brother, who was residing outside the country.

05. The record further indicates that on 19.02.2025, after recording the statement of the petitioner, the learned Magistrate obtained an undertaking from the petitioner with regard to payment of the amount involved and, instead of proceeding further with the trial, referred the matter to the Lok Adalat for amicable settlement.

06. Pursuant thereto, the matter came up before the Lok Adalat on

08.03.2025, where an award came to be passed recording that the parties had amicably settled the dispute. In terms of the said award, the petitioner/accused undertook to pay an amount of ₹3,80,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Eighty Thousand only) to the complainant in full and final settlement of the dispute, within the stipulated period, i.e., by the end of March, 2025. The award further provided that in case of failure to adhere to the terms of settlement, the petitioner herein shall be liable to one year imprisonment and payment of double of the settled amount.

07. On the basis of the aforesaid Lok Adalat Award, the respondent initiated execution proceedings before the competent court. It is stated that in the course of such proceedings, the executing court proceeded to issue coercive process, including warrants of arrest against the petitioner, and listed the matter at short intervals for ensuring compliance of the award.

08. Aggrieved by the Lok Adalat Award dated 08.03.2025, and the consequential execution proceedings initiated pursuant thereto, the petitioner has filed the present petition invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court.

SUBMISSIONS ON