Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010168692024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1463/2024 BISHAL SAHU S/O BABULAB SAHU R/O VILL- AGURI, P.S. MARAN DIST. CHARAIDEU, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI BIPUL PATIR S/O SRI BANIKANTA PATIR R/O JONKARENG P.S. JONAI DIST. DHEMAJI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K DAS, S J DUTTA,C SAIKIA,MS. B CHETRY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS P SAIKIA (R2),MS B GOSWAMI (R2),MR P CHOUDHURY (R2),MR D TALUKDAR (R2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND ORDER 13.06.2025 Page No.# 2/3 1. Heard learned counsel Mr. M. K. Das for the petitioner; learned counsel Mr. D. Talukdar for the respondent No. 2 and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. B. Sharma for the respondent State. 2. The petitioner Bishal Sahu has filed this application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with prayer for setting aside and quashing the FIR being Jonai P.S. Case No. 60/2024 and charge-sheet being C.S. No. 38/2024 dated 30.06.2024 and the entire proceeding of PRC Case No. 68/2024 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.,(M), Jonai at Dhemaji. 3. The allegation against the petitioner is that the accused No. 1 Shri Biju Payeng, on the advice of the petitioner took away the motor cycle from the informant's wife during the absence of the informant. The motor cycle was taken away from the informant's wife in the month of September, 2022 and this motor cycle was purchased from the financer on 20.04.2022. The informant then received a phone call on 19.06.2024 that the motor cycle was taken away as he had to pay the installment of the aforementioned motor cycle. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 i.e., Shri Bipul Patir has submitted that the loan is already closed. There is no dispute relating to any money to be paid by the informant to the petitioner. 5. The matter has been amicably settled between both the parties. There was a misunderstanding between both the parties which resulted in the dispute. No offence under Section 420/34 of the IPC has been made out as the money has already been adjusted. 6. The informant has no objection if the FIR along with the charge-sheet is set aside and quashed. Page No.# 3/3 7. I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection. 8. The matter has been amicably settled between both the parties. This is a matter relating to a dispute arising out of money transaction which is personal in nature. 9. As both the parties have settled their dispute amicably and have buried the hatchet, possibility of conviction appears to be remote and bleak. Indeed, further proceeding will be an abuse of the process of the Court. 10. Thereby, the entire proceeding of PRC Case No. 68/2024 arising out of Jonai P.S. Case No. 60/2024 and charge-sheet No. 38/2024, so far as this petitioner is concerned is set aside and quashed. 11. In terms of the above observation, this application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant