Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010245652025 2025:GAU-AS:16083 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1486/2025 MD SAYEDUR RAHMAN AND ANR SON OF LATE OSMAN ALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KANIHA P.O. P.S. - RANGIA DISTRICT - KAMRUP, ASSAM PIN 781354 2: MUSTAQUE MAHAMMAD ALIAS MD MOSTAK ALI SON OF MD. SAYEDUR RAHMAN RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - KANIHA P.O. P.S.- RANGIA PIN - 781354 DISTRICT - KAMRUP ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AMD ANR REPRESENTED BY ITS P.P. ASSAM 2:SRI BHABENDRA NATH BHARALI SON OF LATE GAJENDRA NATH BHARALI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NIZ BORIGOG GAON EAST - BORIGOG MOUZA P.S. - RANGIA PIN - 781354 DISTRICT - KAMRUP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A PAUL, MS. M M KALITA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 26.11.2025 1. Heard Mr. A Paul, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. This application has been preferred U/S 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking quashment of Rangia P.S Case No. 160/2025 registered U/S 117(2)/324(4)/303(2)/351(2)/3(5) of the BNS, 2023 . 3. As per the FIR, the complainant has stated that the petitioners Md. Sayedur Rahman and Mustaque Mahammad @ Md. Mostak Ali, son of Md. Sayedur Rahman i.e. petitioners No. 1 & 2, both attacked him physically and hit him on his head in front of the Magistrate, Sri. Anupam Boro, A.C.S, Rangia, Sadar. It is further alleged that the petitioners have forcefully occupied his land and on 25.06.2025, they had stolen the construction materials and pakka post. The further allegation that the aforesaid two persons i.e. the petitioners threatened to finish his family and to evict him by demolishing his house from the said locality. 4. Mr. A Paul, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that no case has been made out from the contents of the FIR against the present petitioners and that the provisions of law i.e. Sections 117(2)/324)4)/303(2)/351(2)/3(5) under which the FIR has been registered, are not attracted in the present case. 5. Mr. D.P Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam submits that the case is at the stage of investigation and it would be highly premature to interfere at this stage in a petition U/S 528 of BNSS, 2023. 6. It is of course the settled law that where no case has been made out from the contents of the FIR, normally it would call for interference in Page No.# 3/3 exercise of powers U/S 482 Cr.P.C/528 BNSS. But, in the instant case, I am of the considered opinion that a case has been made out against the present petitioners if the contents of the FIR are taken at their face value. 7. Having regard to the above and also the fact that the investigation is underway, this Court declines to interfere in exercise of its inherent powers. 8. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant