Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040002152025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./22/2025 Rabe Nitik and 13 Ors Son of Late Kohor Nitik, permanent resident of Village Mossing, PO and PS Tuting, Upper Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Jomak Gamno Age: Occupation : Son of ALte Akak Gamno a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh 3: Yaling Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Late Atem Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh 4: Pepen Libang Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Bangger Libang a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Manggem Gamno Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Akak Gamno Page No.# 2/6 a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 6: Makpel Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Late Atem Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Rintem Mitkong Age: Occupation : Son of Late Poksung Mitkong a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Elija Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Agyang Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 9: Boling Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Urin Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 10: Oken Libang Age: Occupation : Son of Late Kombo Libang a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Page No.# 3/6 Arunachal Pradesh. 11: Karjo Libang Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Bangger Libang a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 12: Mitin Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Kertem Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 13: Kindi Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Balim Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 14: Balim Modi Age: Occupation : Son of Late Dake Modi a permanent resident of Village Peki Modi PO and PS Mariyang Upper Siang District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Orin Modi, Jobang Modi,Noni Nobeng,Pura Khongkhung Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, Page No.# 4/6 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 19.03.2025 Heard Mr. O. Modi, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Loyi, the Public Prosecutor, State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This is a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for quashing and setting aside the criminal proceedings of PSG Sessions Case No.23/2024 arising out of MRG P.S. Case No.05/2024. 3. On 22nd April, 2024, the petitioner Rabe Nitik, being the Project Officer APEDA- cum-Sector Magistrate-5, Pakimodi Polling Station, had lodged an FIR alleging that while he was doing his duty at an interior place, the other petitioners in this case, attacked him and other officials busy in performing their election duties. It is alleged that the petitioner Rabe Nitik was forcibly taken to the house of the petitioner Belum Modi and prepared a false case against him, they allegedly demanded ₹1,50,000/- from him as a ransom. 4. It may be stated that the local Kebang, on 19th April, 2024, asked the petitioner Rabe Nitik to pay a fine of ₹1,50,000/- for certain reasons. 5. The learned counsel Mr. Modi has submitted that the petitioner Rabe Nitik lodged the FIR just to evade payment of fine as directed by local Kebang. 6. Be that as it may, the informant Rabe Nitik and the other petitioners have settled their disputes amicably. By filing this joint petition, they have prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings. Page No.# 5/6 7. The learned counsel Mr. Modi, in support of his case, has relied upon two decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that were delivered in State of Madhya Pradesh -versus- Laxmi Narayan & Ors., (2019) 5 SCC 688 and Gian Singh -versus- State of Punjab and Anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303. 8. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 9. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraph 102 of the judgment reads 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, 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 Page No.# 6/6 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.” 10. Considering the circumstances under which the alleged offences were committed, this Court is of the opinion that the offences are private in nature and they do not affect the entire society. It appears that it was a private dispute between two parties. Since both sides have settled their disputes, this Court is of the opinion that there is no possibility of conviction in this case. Therefore, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue before the trial court, would be noting but an abuse of the process of the court. There is no possibility of future conviction in this case. 11. This is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. Therefore, the criminal petition is allowed. 12. The criminal proceedings of PSG Sessions Case No.23/2024 arising out of MRG P.S. Case No.05/2024, is quashed and set aside. The Criminal Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant