Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20312 (GAU)

ASHRAFUZ ZAMAN v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS

Crl.Pet./1316/2024 · 2025-09-17

Sanjeev Kumar Sharma

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010229012024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1316/2024 ASHRAFUZ ZAMAN S/O GOLENUR ISLAM R/O WAR DNO. 01, MANGALDAI P.S. MANGALDAI, DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MUKUTAR RAHMAN S/O LATE PASNUR ALI R/O PUB KALAKUCHI P.S. MUKALMUWA DIST. NALBARI ASSAM 3:RIMPI MONI AHMED D/O MUKUTAR RAHMAN W/O ASHRAFUZ ZAMAN R/O PUB KALAKUCHI P.S. MUKALMUWA DIST. NALBARI ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K THAKUR, MR. M S HUSSAIN,MR. R BARTHAKUR,MS. C CHOUDHURY,MR. D K BAIDYA,MR. D MEDHI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. S SARMAH (R-2, R-3) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 18.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. D.K Baidya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P.S Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam and Mr. Sarmah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2/informant and respondent No. 3/alleged victim. 2. This criminal petition has been preferred seeking quashing of an FIR which was lodged by the respondent No. 2 alleging, inter alia, that the petitioner had kidnapped his daughter i.e. respondent No. 3 on 01.07.2024 and thereafter, assaulted her and broke her mobile phone and took away another of her mobile phone and the victim had to run away to Narayana Hospital and thereafter, she sought help from the authority. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2 & 3 that the petitioner, as well as the alleged victim, have since entered into marriage and are now living happily. A certificate of marriage has been annexed as annexure 4 and affidavits have also been submitted on behalf of the respondents No. 2 & 3 testifying to the above and stating that the dispute arose out of certain misunderstandings and that they have no objection if the FIR in the instant case is quashed. 4. Having regard to the above, I am of the view that it would be an abuse of the process of law to allow the criminal proceedings instituted vide the impugned FIR to continue any further and accordingly, the FIR dated 01.07.2024 and any proceedings subsequent thereto are hereby quashed. 5. The criminal petition stands allowed and disposed of. Page No.# 3/3 JUDGE Comparing Assistant