Ulrich Jordan Mawlong and Ors v. State of Meghalaya

JUDGMENT: (Oral)

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Serial No. 05 Daily List

¶2Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶3By this petition, the petitioners i.e., the petitioner No. 1 (original accused), the petitioner No. 2 (original complainant) and the petitioner No.3 (injured) seek quashing of the FIR registered by the petitioner No. 2 as against the petitioner No. 1 with the Sadar Police Station and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shillong. Quashing is sought on the premise i.e.; all the aforesaid petitioners have amicably resolved their dispute and have entered into a Deed of Settlement. The said Deed of Settlement is at page 65 of the petition.

¶4Admittedly, the parties are inter se related, inasmuch the petitioner No. 1 is the son-in-law of the petitioner No. 3, and the petitioner No. 2 is the brother of the petitioner No. 3. It appears that the parties have amicably settled their dispute. The offence alleged as against the petitioner No. 1 is under Section 118 (1)

of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The allegations made by the petitioner No. 2 against the petitioner No. 1 is that on

24.01.2024 at around 9 a.m., the petitioner No. 3 sustained an injury in a quarrel/altercation which took place at the spur of the moment at their residence. In the altercation, the petitioner No. 1 is alleged to have assaulted the petitioner No. 3 with a screwdriver. The injury certificate is annexed at page 60 of the petition. From a perusal of the injury certificate, it appears that the injury sustained by the petitioner No. 3 is a simple injury i.e., a lacerated wound on the right hand.

¶5Considering the nature of dispute, the relationship between the parties and the amicable settlement between them, there is no impediment in allowing the petition.

¶6The petitioner No. 2 (original complainant) and petitioner No. 3 (injured) appeared through VC. Both of them reiterated their consent to quash the proceeding against the petitioner No.

¶1They reiterated what is stated in the Deed of Settlement.

¶7Accordingly, the FIR registered with the Sadar Police Station being G.R. Case No. 33(A) of 2026 for the offence punishable under Section 118(1) of the BNS and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shillong, stands quashed and set aside.

¶8The petition is allowed and Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms.

¶9Petition is, accordingly disposed of.

¶10All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(Revati Mohite Dere)

Chief Justice Date: 2026.06.17 18:51:50 IST

HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.Petn. No. 78 of 2026 Date of order: 17.06.2026 1. Shri Ulrich Jordan Mawlong. 2. Shri Dondor Jarain. 3. George Jarain ....Petitioners - versus - State of Meghalaya represented by the Secretary, Government of Meghalaya Home (Police) Department, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya. ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Appearance: For the Petitioners : Mr S. Thapa, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr S. Sengupta, Addl PP with Mr A.H. Kharwanlang, Addl PP i) Whether approved for reporting in Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press: