Smti Antilu Gambrey Ngadong and Anr v. The State of Ap

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC040011672024

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./134/2024 Smti Antilu Gambrey Ngadong and Anr Wife of Shri Sohalo Ngadong, presently residing at Village Manchal, PO and PS Hawai, Anjaw, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Sohalo Ngadong Age: Occupation VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Ojing Pada Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP

:: BEFORE :: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R

06.09.2024

Heard the learned counsel Mr. O. Pada appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. G. Tado, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor representing the State of Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 2/4

¶2This is a joint application filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing setting aside the FIR No.06/2021 dated

03.06.2021, registered before Hawai Police Station under Sections 324/341 of the Indian Penal Code (GR No.17/2021) as well as the Charge Sheet No.05/2022 dated 30.09.2022 in corresponding G.R. No.17/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hawai.

¶3The father of the petitioner Smti. Antilu GambreyNgadong had lodged an FIR before police alleging that the other petitioner Shri Sohalo Ngadong being the husband of his daughter had beaten her on 01.06.2021. The informant father has alleged that his son-in-law was drunk and assaulted his daughter with a knife with an intention to kill her.

¶4On the basis of the said FIR, police registered a case and on conclusion of investigation, field the charge sheet against petitioner no.2 Shri Sohalo Ngadong.

¶5Now, both the husband and wife have jointly filed this application praying for quashing the entire proceeding against the husband. They stated that they have compromised their dispute between themselves. They have also entered into a written agreement to that effect.

¶6Mr. Tado submits that for consideration of this application, the scanned copy of the LCR will be required.

¶7I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.

¶8The 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: Page No.# 3/4 "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 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."

¶9In Bhajanlal (supra), the Supreme Court has cautioned that the power under Section 482 of the CrPC is to be sparingly used by the High Courts. The power under Section 482 of the CrPC is meant to prevent abuse of the process of the court.

¶10The ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court is applicable in the Page No.# 4/4 present case.

¶11Moreover, since both the husband and wife having children have decided to compromise their dispute, this Court is of the opinion that they should be given an opportunity to start a new life.

¶12This Court is of the opinion that under the given facts and circumstances of the case, there is no possibility of future conviction in this case. Thus, it is a fit case for exercising the power under Section 482 of the CrPC.

¶13Considering the aforesaid facts, the FIR No.06/2021 dated 03.06.2021, registered before Hawai Police Station under Sections 324/341 of the Indian Penal Code (GR No.17/2021) as well as the Charge Sheet No.05/2022 dated

30.09.2022 in corresponding G.R. No.17/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hawai is quashed and set aside. The Criminal Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant