HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR CM(M)144/2026 CM(2526/2026)

Reservedon:4^thMay,2026.

Pronouncedon:7^thMay,2026 Uploadedon:7^thMay,2026 Whetheroperativepartorfull judgmenthasbeenpronounced:Full ISHFAQAHMADMIR S/OAB.GANIMIR R/OKATHIPORAYARIPORA DISTRICTKULGAM.

……...Petitioner(s)

Through:

Mr. Sajad Ashraf, Adv.

Versus

1. NAZIRAHMADWAGAY S/OMOHDSHABANWAGAY R/OHILLERSHAHABAD TEHSILDOORU,DISTRICTANANTNAG.

2. SUPERINTENDENTDISTRICTJAIL,MATTAN,ANANTNAG.

.……Respondent(s)

Through: CORAM HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

PRAYER:

1. The petitioner, through the medium of the instant petition preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeks quashment and setting aside of the impugned order dated 23.04.2026 passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dooru, Anantnag, in an execution petition bearing File No. 292/2025 and CNR No. JKAN110002922025 with a further direction to the learned trial court to proceed strictly in accordance with the compromise decree dated 27.10.2026 and in terms of order dated 21.04.2026 passed by this Court, and not to resort to coercive measures except in accordance with law.

BRIEF FACTS:

2. The petitioner, through the present petition, has called in question order dated 23.04.2026, whereby the petitioner has been directed to be taken into custody and thereafter ordered to be confined in District Jail, Mutton, till 23^rd May, 2026. It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the said order has been passed in a mechanical manner, without proper application of mind and in complete disregard of the binding directions issued by this Court. The learned counsel further submits that the impugned order has resulted in the illegal detention of the petitioner and is ex facie arbitrary and without jurisdiction, thereby warranting interference by this Court.

3. The brief facts arising out of the instant matter is that, pursuant to the filing of a complaint on 23.11.2022, the parties entered into an amicable settlement and executed a compromise on 27.10.2025, whereby the liability of the petitioner was structured in a manner to be discharged through monthly installments. As per the compromise, it was agreed by the petitioner that payments were to be made periodically and not in a lump sum, unless there was a clearly established default.

4. With a view to appreciate the controversy in question, it would be appropriate to reproduce the terms and conditions of the compromise which has been entered into between the petitioner and private respondent No. 1.

1. That the total outstanding amount in dispute is Rs.3,42,000/- (Rupees Three Lakh Forty-Two Thousand only).

2. That the non-applicant/accused, Mr. Ishfaq Ahmad Mir, has agreed to pay the said amount in monthly instalments of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only)

to the complainant, Mr. Nazir Ahmad Wagay.

3. That the said monthly instalments shall be paid regularly on or before the 10th day of each calendar month, commencing from the month of October 2025.

4. That in the event of default in payment of any single instalment, the entire remaining balance amount (out of Rs.3,42,000/-) shall become immediately due and payable in lump sum, and the complainant shall be at liberty to enforce recovery of the full balance amount through legal process.

5. That upon successful payment of the entire settled amount as per the above terms, the complainant shall have no further claim or grievance against the accused in respect of the present cheque complaint.

6. Both parties undertake to abide by the terms of this compromise and pray that the Hon’ble Court may kindly record the same and dispose of the case in terms thereof.

5. It is the specific case of the petitioner that, pursuant to the said compromise, the petitioner has made an initial payment of Rs. 6,000/- on 7th October 2025 and Rs.10,000/- on 5th February 2026, and thereafter continued to honor his obligations. It is further submitted that the