Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010160882025 2025:GAU-AS:9746 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./897/2025 ANKU MONI CHALIHA S/O- LT. DEVA PRASAD CHALIHA PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- ALIKUCHI, P.SMIKIRBHETA, IN THE DISTRICT OF MORIGAON, ASSAM VERSUS SMT DIPALI TALUKDAR CHALIHA AND ANR WIFE OF ANKU MONI CHALIHA R/O- HOUSE NO. 22, BASITHA CHARIALI, PATARKUCHI, P.SBASISSTHA, GUWAHATI- 781028, DIST- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MRS. R KALITA, P ADHIKARI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 29.07.2025 Heard Ms. R. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent no. 2, State of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. The petitioner has sought to invoke the inherent powers of this Court available under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 to assail an Order dated 22.04.2025, passed in D.V. Case no. 37/2017, presently pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup [M], Guwahati [‘the Trial Court’, for short]. 3. The proceedings of D.V. Case no. 37/2017 got initiated at the instance of the respondent no. 1 as the aggrieved person. 4. By the Order dated 22.04.2025, the learned Trial Court has declined to grant any further adjournment to the respondent no. 1, that is, the petitioner herein and he has been debarred from filing any evidence. 5. Having regard to the issue raised in this criminal petition, the criminal petition is taken up for final consideration at the motion stage itself, dispensing with the process of issuance of any notice to the respondent no. 1 herein, that is, the aggrieved person in D.V. Case no. 37/2017. 6. From the materials made available with the criminal petition, it has emerged that the aggrieved person had adduced evidence of four witnesses and it was on 27.11.2024, the evidence from the aggrieved person side was closed on that day with the examination, cross- examination and discharge of P.W.4. On 27.11.2024, the aggrieved person verbally submitted before that the learned Trial Court that she had no more witness to adduce. The learned Trial Court had thereafter, posted the case on 03.01.2025 for defence evidence. On the subsequent dates of listing, 03.01.2025, 04.02.2025 and 18.03.2025, the petitioner as the respondent no. 1 did not adduce any evidence in his support and on those occasions, he sought adjournment to adduce evidence. 7. When the case was posted on 22.04.2025, the respondent no. 1 was found absent with steps whereas the aggrieved person was in attendance. A petition, Petition no. 1017/2025 was filed on behalf of the respondent no. 1 seeking adjournment. It is relevant to mention that distress warrants were already issued against the respondent no. 1 due to his Page No.# 3/4 failure to deposit interim maintenance which had fallen in arrears. The learned Trial Court observed that the respondent no. 1 had failed to adduce any evidence in defence despite taking repeated adjournments. With such observations, the learned Trial Court has decided not to allow any further adjournment and has debarred the respondent side from filing any D.W. evidence. It is in such facts and circumstances, the instant criminal petition is preferred. 8. Ms. Kalita, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that on 22.04.2025, there was torrential rain and as a result, there was water logging in the entire city. To support such submission, the petitioner has annexed newspaper report. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been suffering from mental ailments and he has been prescribed medication by doctors. The prescriptions are found annexed from Page no. 75 to Page no. 86 of the case papers. There is, however, no certificate to support the fact that the petitioner has been suffering from mental ailments. 9. Aggrieved person side has adduced evidence through four witnesses. On the earlier three occasions, the learned Trial Court granted time to the petitioner to adduce evidence in his support after having been satisfied with the reasons assigned for granting time. The learned Trial Court in its Order dated 22.04.2025 has assigned no reason for rejecting Petition no. 1017/2025 to which the petitioner prayed for an adjournment. The Order dated 22.04.2025 does not reflect that Petition no. 1017/2025 has been rejected. As the petitioner has averred that he has material facts to depose, this Court is of the considered view that in the interest of justice, one last opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to adduce his evidence, subject to payment of cost to the aggrieved person as due to adjournments at his behest since 03.01.2025, the aggrieved person has been made to wait. 10. Having regard to the above considerations, this criminal petition is allowed by granting one last opportunity to the petitioner who is the respondent no. 1 in D.V. Case no. 37/2017 to adduce his evidence, subject to deposit of a cost of Rs. 5,000/- before the learned Trial Court. The petitioner shall adduce defence evidence on the next date of posting of D.V. Case no. 37/2017 with deposit of Rs. 5,000/- before the learned Trial Court. The sum of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner is to be disbursed to the aggrieved person. It is further Page No.# 4/4 observed that in the event of failure to adduce defence evidence by the petitioner on the next date of posting, no further opportunity shall be granted by the learned Trial Court to the petitioner. 11. The criminal petition is allowed to the extent indicated above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant