Md. Suwej Farhat @ Suwez @ Roni and Anr v. The State of Assam

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010235512022 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oCrl.Pet./1185/2022o MD.oSUWEJoFARHATo@oSUWEZo@oRONIoANDoANRo SONoOFoMD.oFAIJULoHOQUE,o R/O-oBORIGAON,o P.S.oANDoDIST.-oMORIGAONo(ASSAM). 2:oTARALIoDEVI oD/O-oLT.oDILIPoKR.oNATH o R/O-oVILL-oCHARAIBAHI o P.S.-oMIKIRBHETA o DIST.-oMORIGAONo(ASSAM)o VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMo REP.oBYoPP,oASSAM. AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oSoKoJAINo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oPP,oASSAMoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/4 :: BEFORE :: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R

22.03.2024

Heard Mr. S.K. Jain, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. R.J. Baruah, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam representing the State.

¶2This is a joint application under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing the PRC Case No.2148/2022 corresponding to Morigaon P.S. Case No.316/2022, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Morigaon, Assam.

¶3On 05.09.2022, when the informant girl was coming back from college, she was forced by the petitioner Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni, aged about 19 years, to sit on his motorcycle pillion. She was taken to an unknown place at Danduwa Banpara. Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni allegedly threw away her mobile phone and also assaulted her with his helmet. Some local people witnessed the incident and they rescued the girl and the petitioner Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni ran away.

¶4Both the girl and Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni have settled their dispute and entered into a legal agreement, copy of which is available with the record. They claim that they were in love and on 05.09.2022, while they were talking to each other, some villagers apprehended them and they forced the girl to lodge an FIR against Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni.

¶5Both the girl and Md. Suwej Farhat @ Roni have jointly filed this application under Section 482 of the CrPC and prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding.

¶6I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. Page No.# 3/4

¶7The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the judgment reads as under: "102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.

(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.

(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.

(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge." Page No.# 4/4

¶8Reverting to the case in hand, I find that there is no possibility of future conviction in this case. So, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court.

¶9I am of the opinion that this is a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC. The criminal petition is allowed.

¶10Accordingly, the PRC Case No.2148/2022 corresponding to Morigaon P.S. Case No.316/2022 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Morigaon, Assam, is quashed and set aside. The criminal petition is disposed of. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant