Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010116442021 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./403/2021 BHUPEN CHANDRA KALITA AND 3 ORS S/O LATE HARA KANTA KALITA R/O VILL- TOKRADIA CHAYGAON, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781124 2: SMTI. BASANTI KALITA W/O SRI BHUPEN CH. KALITA R/O VILL- TOKRADIA CHAYGAON KAMRUP (M) ASSAM PIN-781124 3: SMT. PRANITA BALA CHOUDHURY W/O SRI KAMAL CHOUDHURY R/O VILL- BALACHAR P.S. DUDHNOI GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-783122 4: SRI KAMAL CHOUDHURY SON OF LATE TILAK CHOUDHURY R/O VILL- BALACHAR P.S. DUDHNOI GOALPARA ASSAM PIN-78312 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SMTI. NITUMONI SINGHA Page No.# 2/6 W/O SRI ARNAB CHETTARJEE D/O SRI HIMANGSHU SINGHA R/O JILMIL PATH HOUSE NO. 2 P.S. HATIGAON DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSAM (ADVOCATE) 3:ASI SHANTANU DUTTA PRESENTLY SERVING AT HATIGAON POLICE STATION THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE GUWAHATI CITY PANBAZAR GUWAHATI-1 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D DOLEY, MS S P CHETRY,MR. R P SARMAH Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS. T PARASHAR, AMICUS CURIAE (R-2) :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 17.06.2026 Heard Mr. R.P. Sarmah, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. D. Doley, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P.S. Lahkar, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Ms. T. Parashar, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the informant/respondent no.2. 2. This is an application under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing the proceedings of G.R. Case No.3223/2021 arising out of Hatigaon P.S. Case No.152/2021 pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Page No.# 3/6 Kamrup(M), Guwahati. 3. On 06.09.2021, Smti. Nitumoni Singha got married to Hitesh Kalita. They started their marital life in a rented house at Hatigaon locality of Guwahati city. Since, 3 months prior to filing of the FIR before police, Hitesh Kalita started to live separately from his wife in his own ancestral house. Hitesh Kalita was also involved with a political party and intended to be a candidate for the party in the election. Nitumoni Singha did not like all those things. 4. Nitumoni Singha has alleged that her husband Hitesh Kalita along with her father-in-law Bhupen Chandra Kalita, mother-in-law Basanti Kalita, sister Pronita Bala Choudhury and brother-in-law Kamal Choudhury had taken away her personal properties. 5. Nitumoni Singha has further alleged that the aforesaid people had indulged in black magic with the help of a tantric Sri Tilak Kalita just to cause harm to her. 6. According to Nitumoni Singha, because of the conduct of those people, she has been suffering, physically and mentally. She tried to contact those people over phone, but nobody picked up her phone. 7. On one occasion, i.e. on 28.12.2020, Nitumoni Singha even had undergone abortion of her pregnancy, that too, on the advice of the aforementioned tantric. 8. On 21.02.2021, her husband Hitesh Kalita asked her to come to Gohpur. But till late night, he did not come to Gohpur. Nitumoni Singha has alleged that Hitesh Kalita in collusion with the aforementioned people of his family threatened to kill her. 9. Police registered the case under Sections 120B/417/ 498A/325/324 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code and the charge sheet was filed under those sections of Indian Penal Code. 10. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 11. At this stage, it would be fruitful to go through the definitions of the aforesaid Page No.# 4/6 sections of Indian Penal Code. The definition of criminal conspiracy is defined by Section 120A of the Indian Penal Code and it reads as under: “120A. Definition of criminal conspiracy.- When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done,— (1) an illegal act, or (2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy: Provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof. Explanation It is immaterial whether the illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.]” 12. The definition of cheating has been provided by Section 415 of the Code, which reads as under: “415. Cheating.— Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”. Explanation.— A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.” 13. The accusation under Section 489A of the IPC relates to demand of dowry. Page No.# 5/6 Similarly, Section 325 and 324 of the Penal Code defines voluntarily causing hurt or grievous hurt. Section 313 of the said Code talks about miscarriage without the consent of the woman. 14. The 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 Page No.# 6/6 vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 15. Reverting to the case in hand, in the case in hand, there are no elements for a prima facie case under the aforesaid sections of law. In this case, nobody is going to be convicted in future. Therefore, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue before the trial court, would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. This is a fit case for exercising the power under Section 482 of the CrPC. 16. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. 17. The proceedings of G.R. Case No.3223/2021 arising out of Hatigaon P.S. Case No.152/2021 pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, is quashed and set aside. JUDGE Comparing Assistant