Page No. 1/3 GAHC010148722025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./856/2025 MD. ABDUL HANNAN S/O- AYNAL HOQUE. S/O- AYNAL HOQUE. VILL.- NICHANAR CHAR, P.O.- KALAIRDIA, P.S.- ALOPATI CHAR, DIST.- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781127. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:BUDDHESWARI KARMAKAR W/O- LATE RANJIT KARMAKAR. VILL.- NO.3 MADHAKALI GAON P.O.- KHOWANG P.S.- KHOWANG DIST.- DIBRUGARH ASSAM PIN-785675 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S AHMED, T UDDIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 29.07.2025 Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 1, State of Assam. Page No. 2/3 2. The petitioner has sought to invoke the inherent powers of this Court available under Section 528, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 for setting aside and quashing a Charge-Sheet dated 28.02.2022 submitted in connection with Moran Police Station Case no. 26/2022. 3. It has emerged from the materials on record that a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged by the informant, Budheswari Karmakar on 14.02.2022 before the Officer In-Charge, Moran Police Station stating inter-alia that at around 09-30 p.m. on 25.01.2022, while her husband, Ranjit Karmakar was proceeding from Moran towards his own residence at No. 3 Madhakali by riding a motorcycle bearing registration no. AS-06/N-6648, the motorcycle was hit from behind by a vehicle bearing registration no. AS-15/N-1399 [Maruti Car] proceeding from the same direction. It was stated that the Maruti Car hit motorcycle from behind at a place near Village – 108 No. Khowang Grand near Kareng Dhaba on NH-37. The FIR alleged that the Maruti Car was being driven at an excessive speed and in a negligent manner and it knocked down the motorcycle rode by the husband of the informant from the back side. As a result, Ranjit Karmakar sustained serious injuries on his head, chest and other parts of his person. Though Ranjit Karmakar was taken immediately after the accident to a Government Hospital, but the doctors their declared him as brought dead 4. From the charge-sheet, it further transpires that during investigation, statements of a nos. of witnesses were recorded. Finding sufficient materials against the petitioner who was the driver of the Maruti Car, he was arrested and thereafter, allowed to go on bail. Finding sufficient materials against the petitioner for committing the offences under Section 279, IPC and Section 304, IPC, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] submitted a charge-sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vide Charge-Sheet no. 13/2022 on 28.02.2022. In the charge-sheet, names of eight nos. of persons were listed as prosecution witnesses. 5. The instant criminal petition is preferred on the ground that in the said accident, the petitioner also sustained grievous injuries on his person. After the accident, the family members and relatives of the petitioner approached the informant of Moran Police Station Page No. 3/3 Case no. 26/2022 to settle the matter amicably. After a round of negotiation and out of sympathy, the informant agreed to compromise the case and subsequently, the matter has been amicably settled in between the petitioner’s side and the informant’s side in presence of elderly persons of the locality. 6. Nothing has been brought on record to substantiate the matter of negotiation and settlement between the petitioner and the informant of Moran Police Station Case no. 26/2022. The First Information Report [FIR] lodged in connection with Moran Police Station Case no. 26/2022 has not been annexed with the criminal petition. Sustaining injury on his person by the petitioner in the same road traffic accident cannot be a ground to set aside and quash a charge-sheet which has been submitted by the I.O. finding sufficient materials against the petitioner for committing the offences under Section 279, IPC and Section 304A, IPC. 7. On query to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is submitted that the trial of the case has not yet proceeded and the case is at the stage of appearance of the petitioner as the accused. 8. Having regard to the settled proposition laid down for invoking inherent powers of this Court under Section 528, BNSS, 2023 [earlier Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973], as settled by the decision in State of Haryana and others vs. Bhajanlal and others, 1992 Supp [1] SCC 335, this Court does not find any merit in the instant criminal petition. Consequently, the instant criminal petition is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant