Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040018612025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./256/2025 Miss Taku Pika and 4 Ors Daughter of Shri Taku Tayi, a resident of Narba Colony Itanagar, PO and PS Itanagar, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Miss Byabang Rebecca Dui Age: Occupation : Daughter of Shri Byabang Paul resident of Transport Staff Colony Karsingsa PO and PS Banderdewa Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Miss Byabang Angu Age: Occupation : Daughter of Shri Byabang Kayum resident of H Sector Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Miss Byabang Pekik Age: Occupation : Daughter of Late Byabang Eha resident of Zero Point Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Tage Sambio Age: Page No.# 2/5 Occupation : Son of Late Tage Tailyang a permanent resident of Daying Ering Colony Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh representing the minor accused person namely Mast Tage Dok VERSUS The State of AP represented through the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Kemo Lollen, Arun Yun,Maryum Sora,Geli Taye,D Ado Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER 18.11.2025 Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application has been jointly filed by the informant/petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 and petitioner No. 5, the father and natural guardian of the juvenile in conflict with law (JCL), under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, praying for quashing and setting aside the FIR dated 30.03.2025 filed by petitioner No. 1, and the subsequent FIRs dated 04.04.2025 filed by petitioner Nos. 2 to 4, all of which are registered as Itanagar W.P.S. Case No. 11/2025, under Sections 77/79 of the BNS read with Sections 66E/67/67A of the IT Act, 2000, along with Charge-sheet No. 48/2025 dated 28.05.2025 and Supplementary Charge-sheet No. 48(A)/2025 dated 18.08.2025. Page No.# 3/5 3. The allegation in the aforesaid FIRs, separately filed by petitioner Nos. 1 to 4/informants/victims, is that they were surreptitiously filmed/videographed while taking bath and changing clothes, and thereafter their nude videos were circulated through an Instagram account operating under the username “LEAKNSTUFF.” The police clubbed the subsequent FIRs filed separately by petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 together with the FIR lodged by petitioner No. 1 dated 30.03.2025, and accordingly registered Itanagar W.P.S. Case No. 11/2025 under Sections 77/79 of the BNS read with Sections 66 (E)/67/67A of the IT Act, 2000. 4. Based on the FIRs, a joint investigation was conducted. During the investigation, it was found that the alleged acts were committed by a 14-year- old minor boy, a juvenile in conflict with law (JCL). Accordingly, on 09.04.2025, the child in conflict with law (CICL) was apprehended. However, by order dated 24.04.2025, the CICL was released on bond by the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Yupia. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer, upon completion of the investigation, submitted Charge-sheet No. 48/2025, under Sections 77/78/308 of the BNS read with Sections 66(E)/67/67A of the IT Act, 2000, dated 28.05.2025, and Supplementary Charge-sheet No. 48(A)/2025, under Sections 77/79 of the BNS read with Sections 66(E)/67/67A of the IT Act, 2000, dated 18.08.2025. The case is presently pending before the learned Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Yupia. 5. Mr. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that during the pendency of the JJB proceedings, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes. He further submits that petitioner No. 1 executed a settlement agreement dated 14.04.2025, and petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 entered into a mutual settlement agreement dated 30.10.2025 with petitioner No. 5 (father of the JCL). In the said agreements, the informants/petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 have Page No.# 4/5 specifically stated that considering the tender age of the JCL, his future prospects, and with a view to facilitate his rehabilitation and reintegration into society, they have voluntarily decided not to pursue the complaints any further and have forgiven the juvenile for his conduct. Petitioner No. 5, father of the JCL, has undertaken to ensure proper care, supervision, counseling, and education of the juvenile so that such conduct is not repeated in future. 6. In this regard, Mr. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor, upon instructions, submits that in view of the genuine and voluntary settlement between the parties, continuation of the proceedings before the JJB against the JCL would not serve any fruitful purpose, particularly considering the objectives of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, which emphasizes reformation rather than retribution for juveniles. 7. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of decisions, has held that while exercising inherent powers, even non-compoundable offences may be quashed where the offence is predominantly private in nature, does not involve overriding public interest, and where the victim and the offender have amicably settled their dispute. Further, in cases involving juveniles, the court must give primacy to the principle of reformation and to the best interest of the child, ensuring the reintegration of the juvenile into society. 9. In the present case, the informants/victims/petitioner Nos. 1 to 4 has voluntarily settled the matter with the father of the JCL. The juvenile was only 14 years old at the time of the incident, and continuation of criminal proceedings, despite the settlement, would defeat the very spirit of juvenile Page No.# 5/5 justice and may cause irreparable harm to the mental well-being and future prospects of the child. In view of the mutual settlement, the nature of allegations, the age of the JCL, the undertaking furnished by the father of the JCL, and the stand of the learned Public Prosecutor, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by allowing the proceedings before the learned JJB to continue. 10. Accordingly, in exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 of the BNSS, the FIRs dated 30.03.2025 and 04.04.2025 (three subsequent FIRs), registered as Itanagar W.P.S. Case No. 11/2025, under Sections 77/79 of the BNS read with Sections 66(E)/67/67A of the IT Act, 2000, as well as all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, including Charge-sheet No. 48/2025 dated 28.05.2025 and Supplementary Charge-sheet No. 48(A)/2025 dated 18.08.2025, pending before the learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Yupia, are hereby quashed. 11. The proceedings against the juvenile in conflict with law relating to the above FIRs and all proceedings stand closed. 12. In view of the above, this criminal petition is allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant