Yayi Pamo and 2 Ors v. The State of Ap

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040003092023

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn. 32/2023 1:Yayi Pamo and 2 Ors. W/o Late Taka Pamo, Permanent Resident of Sirum Village, PO/PS Kaying, Siang District,AP 2: Tajar Pamo S/o Late Taka Pamo

Permanent Resident of Sirum Villlage PO/PS Kaying Siang District AP 3: Baby Jomyang D/o Shri Taling Jomyang

Permanent Resident of Kaying PO/PS Kaying Siang District A VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF AP Through the Public Prosecutor

Advocate for the Petitioner : Dugmar Kamduk Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP

Page No.# 2/4 :: BEFORE :: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R

29.03.2023

Heard Mr. D. Kamduk, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor representing the State of Arunachal Pradesh/sole respondent.

¶2This is a joint application filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing the criminal proceeding of PSG Sessions Case No.07/2023 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to Kaying P.S. Case No.06/2020 pending in the court of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶3Smti Yayi Pamo has lodged an FIR alleging that on 09.09.2020 at about 5.22 P.M., Miss Baby Jomyang attacked her son Tajar Pamo with a sharp weapon. Tajar Pamo allegedly sustained serious injuries.

¶4Thereafter, they had a village meeting in the local Kebang. They mutually settled the matter between themselves.

¶5Now, all the three petitioners have come to this Court with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceedings on the ground that they had already compromised and mutually settled the matter.

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

¶7The guidelines for quashing of the criminal proceeding has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and Ors. -versus-Bhajanlal and Ors., reported in AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the said judgment is quoted hereunder: "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 channelized 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 Page No.# 4/4 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."

¶8The power under Section 482 of the CrPC is the inherent power of the High Court to prevent abuse of the process of the court. In this case, I do not see any possibility of future conviction. Under such circumstance, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue in the trial court, would be an abuse of the process of the court.

¶9Therefore, this is a fit case for exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC. Accordingly, the criminal proceeding of PSG Sessions Case No.07/2023 under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to Kaying P.S. Case No.06/2020 pending in the court of the learned District & Sessions Judge, Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh is quashed. The Criminal Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant