Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040015732025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./205/2025 Sahil Flago @ Fyago and Anr Son of Late Thira Flago, a permanent resident of Village Flago, PO Pipu PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Bazaar Line Seppa, PO and PS Seppa, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Smti Mechari Mangkhya @ Anu Mangkhya Flago Age: Occupation : Wife of Shri Sahil Flago @ Fyago a permanent resident of Village Flago PO Pipu PS Chayang Tajo East Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Bazaar Line Seppa PO and PS Seppa East Kameng District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Tabo Gyadi, Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER 28.11.2025 Heard Mr. T. Gyadi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed jointly by the accused/petitioner No. 1 and the informant/petitioner No. 2, praying for setting aside and quashing G.R. Case No. 20/2019, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, arising out of Seppa W.P.S. Case No. 04/2019, registered under Sections 448/427/324 of the IPC. 3. The scanned copy of the case diary along with the status report, as called for, has already been received. 4. The petitioner No. 1, Shri Sahil Flago @ Fyago, is the accused/husband of petitioner No. 2, Smti. Mechari Mangkhya @ Anu Mongkhya Flago, the informant in the above case. 5. The brief facts leading to the filing of this criminal petition is that, on 24.03.2019, the informant/petitioner No. 2 lodged a written FIR before the Seppa Women Police Station against her husband/accused/petitioner No. 1, alleging that the accused/petitioner No. 1 came to the residence of her elder brother at around 10:00 P.M., broke down the door, forcefully entered her room, and assaulted her mercilessly with a sharp weapon, as a result of which she sustained grievous injuries on her right hand and stomach. Based on the said FIR, Seppa W.P.S. Case No. 04/2019 was registered under Sections 448/427/324 Page No.# 3/5 of IPC and investigation commenced. However, till date, the case has not been charge-sheeted and the same is pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa. 6. Mr. Gyadi, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that both the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, being husband and wife, having three children, have already settled the matter amicably in the year 2019 by executing a settlement agreement dated 30.03.2019, whereby petitioner No. 2/informant stated that she had lodged the FIR against petitioner No. 1/accused due to some misunderstanding and family pressure. She further stated that they are now residing happily as husband and wife along with their five children (two being born after the alleged incident), that she has no grievance against the accused/petitioner No. 1, and that she does not wish to pursue the matter any further. It is further submitted that after execution of the said agreement, the matter was communicated to the Investigating Officer, who assured the parties that the investigation of the case would not proceed further. However, the I.O of the case submitted the charge-sheet and now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa. Accordingly, the petitioners have jointly prayed for quashing of the case against the accused by invoking the power under Section 528 of the BNSS. 7. On the other hand, Ms. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that the dispute is purely matrimonial in nature and has been amicably settled between the parties vide settlement agreement dated 30.03.2019. Since there is no likelihood of conviction, she has no objection to the prayer made by the petitioners for quashing the proceeding. 8. I have heard the learned counsels for both sides and also perused the available record. Page No.# 4/5 9. It is evident that the dispute is between husband and wife, and both parties have resolved their differences through a compromise deed. Petitioner No. 2/informant has clearly stated that she does not wish to proceed further with the case. 10. Since the matter arises out of a matrimonial dispute and does not have any significant impact on society at large, continuing with the criminal trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa would amount to an exercise in futility and an abuse of the process of law. 11. It is pertinent to note that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in a catena of decisions, has held that in cases involving matrimonial disputes and other family matters, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding to Section 528 of the BNSS), can quash the criminal proceedings if the matter has been amicably settled and such quashing would serve the ends of justice. 12. In this regard, the notable judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court include: i. Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Court held that the High Court can quash criminal proceedings in cases that are overwhelmingly or predominantly civil in nature, particularly matrimonial disputes, when the parties have resolved their dispute amicably. ii. Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr.,reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, wherein it was held that in cases essentially of a private nature, where the possibility of conviction is remote, proceedings may be quashed to promote harmony. Page No.# 5/5 iii. B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, wherein the Court observed that in matrimonial disputes, if the parties have settled their differences, there is no justification in continuing the criminal proceedings. 13. Also, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 held that the High Court in exercise of power under 482 of the Code can quashed the criminal proceeding even for non-compoundable offences which are private in nature and do not have serious impact on society on the ground that there is settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender. 14. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is satisfied that allowing the proceedings to continue would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 15. Accordingly, the criminal proceedings in G.R. Case No. 20/2019, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, arising out of Seppa W.P.S. Case No. 04/2019 under Sections 448/427/324 of the IPC, against accused/petitioner No. 1, Shri Sahil Flago @ Fyago, are hereby quashed. 16. In terms of the above, the joint petition filed under Section 528 of the BNSS stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant