Page No.# 1/7 GAHC040020332025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./273/2025 Sangha Sanjoy and Anr Son of Shri Sangha Ajak, resident of Patuk Koloriang, Kurng Kumey District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Nadey Chumyiang Age: Occupation : Son of Late Mare Nade resident of 5/1 Colony Banderdewa PO and PS Banderdewa Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Roni Chongruju, Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA ORDER Date : 12.12.2025 Heard Ms. R. Chongruju, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Page No.# 2/7 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, jointly filed by the petitioners, praying for quashing of the criminal proceedings in G.R. Case No.119/2025, arising out of FIR No.15/2025 dated 11.02.2025, under Sections 106(1)/281 of the BNS, 2023, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, on the basis of the settlement arrived at between the petitioners. 3. It is the case of the petitioners that on 01.11.2025, an FIR was lodged before the Banderdewa Police Station, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh, by one Shri Chumyiang Nade, the petitioner No.2 against petitioner No.1. It was alleged therein that on 10.02.2025 at around 11:00 PM, the wife of the complainant, namely Smti. Bengia Yapiam Nade, met with an accident on the Nirjuli–Karsingsa road, wherein she was hit by a motorcycle bearing Registration No. AR-01T-7785, ridden by the petitioner No.1. It was further alleged that the wife of the complainant succumbed to her injuries and was declared brought dead at TRIHMS Hospital, Naharlagun. 4. Upon receipt of the FIR, G.R. Case No.119/2025 was registered and after investigation, charge-sheet was filed on 11.06.2025, before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the proceedings before the learned CJM, the complainant, i.e., petitioner No.2, and the accused, petitioner No.1, have amicably settled the matter by executing a settlement deed dated 10.06.2025, wherein both parties have agreed to settle the case amicably and not to pursue the proceedings any further, pending before the learned CJM, Yupia. 6. It is submitted that in view of the settlement agreement, the petitioner Page No.# 3/7 No.2 has agreed not to pursue the case lodged before the Banderdewa Police Station against petitioner No.1 and further agreed not to blame the family of petitioner No.1 for the death of his wife. Learned counsel further submits that in terms of the settlement agreement, a compensation amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs) was paid by petitioner No.1 to petitioner No.2. To substantiate this, a xerox copy of the money receipt dated 10.06.2025 issued by the petitioner No.2 has been submitted before this Court, which is marked as ‘X’ for the purpose of identification and kept on record. In view of the aforesaid settlement arrived at between the parties, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the criminal proceedings pending before the learned CJM, Yupia should be quashed. She submits that since the complainant himself has agreed not to pursue the proceedings, the likelihood of conviction of petitioner No.1 is remote and bleak. In view of the above, learned counsel submits that as the petition has been jointly filed by the complainant and the accused, being petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, the same deserves to be allowed by quashing the proceedings pending before the learned CJM, Yupia 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also relied upon a judgment passed in Ojing Darin & Ors. vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh (Crl. Pnt. No.09/2024), decided by this Court on 12.02.2025. She submits that in similar circumstances involving an accidental death, where the parties had entered into a settlement agreement and compensation had been paid to the family of the victim, this Court was pleased to quash the proceedings pending before the trial Court. She, therefore, contends that the present case stands on an identical footing and deserves similar treatment. 8. Ms. Hage, learned Addl. P.P., submits that in view of the settlement agreement executed between the parties and the fact that compensation has Page No.# 4/7 already been paid to the complainant, she has no objection if the instant petition is allowed by quashing the proceedings pending before the learned CJM, Yupia. 9. This Court has heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and has also perused the materials placed before this Court. 10. Having perused the judgment dated 12.02.2025 passed in the aforesaid case, Ojing Darin (supra), this Court is also of the considered opinion that in view of the settlement arrived at between the accused and the complainant as well as taking into account of the fact that a suitable compensation has also been paid to the complainant (victim’s husband), this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant petition should be allowed by quashing the proceeding pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, in connection with the G.R. Case No.119/2025, arising out of FIR No.15/2025 dated 11.02.2025, under Sections 106(1)/281 of the BNS, 2023. 11. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it may be relevant at this stage to refer to the case, where the law on quashment of criminal proceedings has been settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the catena of decisions including the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688, which is reproduced herein below: “15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under: 15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to Page No.# 5/7 quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves; 15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society; 15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender; 15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the Page No.# 6/7 sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove; 15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.” 12. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, as well as the materials available on record, and also taking into account the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases, and in view of the fact that the parties have settled the matter and compensation has already been paid to the complainant, who is the husband of the victim/deceased, and also considering the nature of the offence Page No.# 7/7 alleged, this Court is of the considered view that the continuance of the criminal proceedings would be a futile exercise as the chances of conviction are bleak and remote, which would amount to abuse of the process of law. Accordingly, the G.R. Case No.119/2025, arising out of FIR No.15/2025 dated 11.02.2025, under Sections 106(1)/281 of the BNS, 2023, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, is hereby set aside and quashed. 13. The criminal petition stands disposed of, in terms above. JUDGE Comparing Assistant