Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010255602025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1425/2025 AVINASH BHARTIYA S/O SRI RAMAVATAR BHARTIA, R/O FLAT NO. 9A, BLOCK C, SIGNATURE ESTATE, OPPOSITE D.G.P. OFFICE, B.K. KAKATI ROAD, ULUBARI, P.O. ULUBARI, P.S. PALTANBAZAR, GUWAHATI 781007, DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM. 2:SUNIL KUMAR SAHU S/O RAJENDRA SAHU R/O KALAPAHAR NEAR FOREST OFFICE P.S. FATASIL AMBARI DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 78101 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S M ABDULLAH P, MD R ISLAM,MD IMRAN,MS F HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR S H SIKDAR (R-2) Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER 19.11.2025 Heard Mr. S M Abdullah P, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K K Parasor, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as Mr. S Munir, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the FIR dated 03.09.2025 registered as Fatasil Ambari P.S. Case No. 127/2025 under Sections 105/125/285/3(5) of the BNS, 2023. On 03.09.2025, at about 3.15 PM, the son of the respondent no. 2 fell into an open drain and died. The drain was being constructed by Bhartia Infra Projects Limited. On the basis of the FIR, lodged by the respondent no. 2, Police registered the case. The said company paid the compensation of Rs.13,00,000/- to the respondent no. 2. Now, the respondent no. 2 has stated that he does not want to proceed further with the criminal case as he has been adequately compensated for the death of his son. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. In the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under : “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 channelised 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, Page No.# 3/3 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 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.” Reverting to the case in hand, this court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances, there is no possibility of conviction in future. Therefore, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court would be nothing but an abuse of process of the court. This is a fit case for exercising the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. For the aforesaid premised reasons, the FIR dated 03.09.2025 registered as Fatasil Ambari P.S. Case No. 127/2025 under Sections 105/125/285/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 is quashed and set aside. The criminal petition is accordingly disposed of. `` JUDGE Comparing Assistant