Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040019362025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./262/2025 Peli Basar and 9 Ors Son of Late Marte Basar, resident of Village Gori, PO and PS Basar, Lepa Rada District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Kento Angu Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Goken Angu resident of Angu Village PO and PS Angu West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Pasang Sharjo Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Dorjee Phurba Sharjo resident of Village Menchuka PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Rinjin Khandu Sona Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Pasang Tsering Sona resident of Village Galing PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Sange Chukla Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Pema Chukla Page No.# 2/5 resident of Yorni Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: Tenzing Chukla Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Pema Chukla resident of Yorni Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Pema Lera Chukla Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Phurba Chukla resident of Sorangdem Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Nima Chukla Age: Occupation : Son of Late Chenjor Chukla resident of Dorjeeling Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 9: Sange Tsering Sona Age: Occupation : Son of Pasang Tsering Sona representing on behalf of cousin brother Shri Kesang Dawa Philley (alleged CICL) Son of Shri Dasho Philley resident of Segong Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh. 10: Pemba Tsering Naksang Age: Occupation : Son of Sange Khandu Naksang representing on behalf of his younger brother Shri Lera Naksang (alleged CICL) Son Page No.# 3/5 of Shri Sange Khandu Naksang resident of Lhallung Village PO and PS Mechuka Shi Yomi District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Dorjee Phinjo Sona, 1 R Singhi,S K Sharma Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, ::BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 17.12.2025 Heard the learned counsel Mr. S.K. Sarma appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This is a joint application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the criminal proceedings of G.R. No.01/2025 (corresponding to Mechukha P.S. Case No.01/2025) pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 3. On 14.02.2025 at about 9.30 A.M., the petitioners forming a mob went to attack Shri Peli Basar, who is an Engineer by profession. The petitioners assaulted him and also caused damage to his Government quarter. Page No.# 4/5 4. Now, the victim Shri Peli Basar and the other petitioners have come together to this Court praying for quashing the aforesaid criminal proceedings against the culprits. They have also stated that they have compromised their dispute and also repaired the damaged portions of the Government quarter. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 6. The guidelines for quashing of the criminal proceeding has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana and Ors. -versus- Bhajanlal and Ors., reported in AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the said judgment is quoted hereunder: “102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelized and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised. (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused. (2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence Page No.# 5/5 but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.” 7. Reverting to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is applicable in the present case. I find that under the given facts and circumstances of the case, there is no possibility of future conviction in this case. Thus, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court, would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. It is a fit case for exercising the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. 8. In view of the above, the criminal proceedings of G.R. No.01/2025 (corresponding to Mechukha P.S. Case No.01/2025) pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, is set quashed and aside. The Criminal Petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant