Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010146412023 2025:GAU-AS:11831 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./692/2023 MUSTAFA KAMAL PASSA @ MUSTAFA KAMAL PASA S/O- LATE AMSAR ALI MUKTAR, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF R.D.M. ROAD, AMIN PATTY, P.O. NAGAON, P.S. NAGAON SADAR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 301, SHANTI TIRTHA APARTMENT, MILANPUR PATH, NEAR HDFC BANK, BELTOLA BRANCH, BELTOLA, GUWAHATI-781028, DIST. KAMRUP(M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:MUSTT. ASHA BEGUM W/O- MD. RAFIQUE AHMED R/O- PRATAP SHARMA ROAD NATUN BAZAR P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : M K BORAH, MS. P. KASHYAP Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. M AHMED (R-2),MR. S W HUSSAIN (R-2),MR. A. K. KANU (R-2) Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 02.09.2025 Heard Mr. M, K. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. M. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and Ms. S. H. Borah, learned APP appears on behalf of the State respondent. 2. This is an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, 1973, for quashing the proceeding of the NI Case No. 68/2015 pending before the learned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon, Assam. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the complainant, i.e. the respondent No. 2, filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon. It is alleged in the complaint that the petitioner took an amount of Rs. 15,00,000.00 ( Rupees. Fifteen Lakhs) from the respondent No. 2 as a loan to be repaid later on. However, when the respondent No. 2 approached the petitioner for payment of the loan taken by him, the petitioner handed over him a cheque No. 003477 of H.D.F. C. Bank Ltd., A. T. Road, Haiborgaon, Nagaon. When the aforesaid cheque was deposited in the bank, the bank returned the cheque with a comment “Insufficiency of Fund”. Being so aggrieved, the complainant filed the aforesaid N.I. Case, and the same was registered as N.I. Case No. 68/2015. Thereafter, the cognizance of the matter was taken by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. Accordingly, summons were issued to the accused on 21.08.2015 fixing 17.09.2015 for appearance. However, though several dates were given for appearance of the accused/petitioner, he failed to appear before Page No.# 3/4 the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. On 22.05.2018, a petition was filed by the accused praying to show arrest of the accused petitioner in the case pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, as the accused person was in jail hajot in connection with another case. Accordingly, the accused was taken in judicial custody in that case also, issuing custody warrant. However, later on a petition filed by the accused person for bail, the accused was released on bail on the very same date. 4. It is seen from the record that though the petitioner was there inside the jail for a certain period of time, he was released on 22.05.2018 and even thereafter, he did not make himself present before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court. 5. As per the order dated 13.06.2023, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, issued the bailable warrant against the accused person. Being aggrieved by the issuance of such bailable warrant dated 13.06.2023, the accused petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, for quashing of the proceedings pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. 6. Having gone through the materials on record and submissions made by the respective counsels, this Court is convinced that the accused petitioner has gravely abused the judicial process pending before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaon. There is absolutely no ground made out in this case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Though the submissions have been made that the accused petitioner may be allowed to file a petition under Section 205 corresponding to Section 228 of the BNSS for dispensation of his appearance before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, this Court is refrained from commenting on the aforesaid submission as Page No.# 4/4 liberty/option is always available with the accused petitioner to approach the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate with such prayer. 7. In view of the aforesaid, this Criminal Revision Petition is dismissed. 8. Interim order passed earlier is hereby vacated. JUDGE Comparing Assistant