Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010006342014 2025:GAU-AS:14506 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./110/2014 MRS. KRISHNA BARMAN and 6 ORS W/O GOURI BARMAN R/O TARUN NAGAR, BYE LANE -6 P.O. BHANGAGARH DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM. 2: SURAJ CHOUDHURY S/O LT. HEM CHOUDHURY R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-8 P.S. BHANGAGARH DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 3: ARJUN RAI S/O SRI BRINDA RAI R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE- 3 P.S. BHANGAGARH GHY-5 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 4: TULIKA BORA CHOUDHURY W/O BHABEN CHOUDHURY R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-8 P.S. BHANGAGARH GHY-5 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 5: ANJALEE BHATACHARJEE W/O RAJU BHATACHARJEE C/O DILIP PAL R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-2 GHY-5 P.S.BHANGAGARH 6: LAKHMI JAISWAL W/O BASANT LAL JAISWAL R/O BORA SERVICE Page No.# 2/5 7: ROMILA MEDHI W/O UNKNOWN R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-8 GHY-5 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 2 ORS 2:SRI SUDAMA JAISWAR S/O LT. SHYAMLAL JAISAWAR R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-8 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM. 3:SRI KRISHNA JAISAWAR S/O LT. MOHAN JAISAWAR R/O TARUN NAGAR BYE LANE-8 DIST. KAMRUP M ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.M CHOUDHURY, MR.A K CHOUDHURY,MR.T ALI,MR.H BAILUNG,MR.D CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : MR.I CHOUDHURY, ,,PP, ASSAM,MR.P KATAKI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR ORDER Date : 28-10-2025 Heard Mr. S. Difusa, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Chutia, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1. None has appeared for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. 2. The present criminal petition has been instituted praying for quashing the proceeding instituted by the respondent No. 2, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati. The respondent No. 2, herein, as complainant had Page No.# 3/5 instituted a complaint case being C.R. Case No. 3638C/2013, before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, inter-alia, alleging therein that on 27- 10-2013 at about 11:30 Hrs. the respondents, i.e. the petitioner, herein, along with some others had forcefully entered into their residence and had demolished a portion of their boundary wall with the intention to grab their land. It was further alleged that when she along with her brother tried to prevent the petitioners, herein, they had threatened the complainant of using force to force them to leave Tarun Nagar. It was further alleged in the complaint that the petitioners, herein, had used filthy language and also abused her sister-in-law Prabhati Jaiswal. The complainant in the complaint further alleged that her brother Krishna Jaiswal on the same day had gone to Bhangagarh Police Station to lodge an FIR, but till 28-10-2013 the police did not register the same and as such they were living in constant fear and accordingly, they had approached the learned Court by way of instituting the complaint case. It is seen that the learned Trial Court had recorded the deposition of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and thereafter, also examined the witnesses and had taken cognizance of the offence and issued summons to the present petitioners. Accordingly, being aggrieved the petitioners had instituted the present proceeding. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also perused the materials available on record. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the matter involves dispute of civil nature and accordingly, complaint case instituted by the respondent No. 2 Page No.# 4/5 would not be maintainable. He further submits that the petitioners, barring the petitioner No. 6, were members of the Tarun Nagar Unnayan Samity and they had only tried to reconcile the dispute existing between the respondent No. 2 and her other family members, with regard to the possession of a plot of land in question. She further submits that the respondent No. 3, was a signatory to the compromise arrived at between the family members of respondent Nos. 2 & 3 and had undertaken to withdraw the complaint case pending before the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) at Guwahati. However, the same was not complied with, requiring the present petitioners to institute the present proceeding. The counsel for the petitioners, in the above premises, submits that the proceeding in the C.R. Case No. 3638C/2013 would require to be quashed by this Court. None has entered appearance on behalf of the complainant, i.e. the respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 3, herein. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the materials available on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has projected that the dispute involved is of civil nature and the same to be existing between the respondent No. 2 and 3 and their other relatives pertaining to the possession of the land in question. This Court on examination of the complaint petition finds that the allegation leveled against the present petitioner is with regard to the forcible entry to the residence of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 by the petitioners and others and also demolition of a portion of the boundary wall which was projected to be with the intention to grab the land of the respondent Nos. Page No.# 5/5 2 and 3. The above being the position, a cognizable offence having been committed in the matter by the petitioners, herein, this Court is of the considered view that the complaint case as instituted in the matter by the respondent No. 2, herein, would not mandate interference. The petitioners have the opportunity to place their stand before the learned Trial Court and to pray before the learned Trial Court for dismissal of the complaint case in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above conclusions, this Court is of the considered view that the present petition is devoid of any merit and the same stands dismissed. 7. Interim order passed earlier by this Court vide order dated 20-02-2014 stands vacated. The Trial Court shall now proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with law. 8. In view of the above observations and directions, this criminal petition stands dismissed. 9. A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati for information and necessary action. JUDGE Comparing Assistant