Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040010372025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./133/2025 Miss Hembi Ete and Anr Daughter of Late Bimba Ete, a permanent resident of Paya Village, PO and PS Aalo, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Tumge Bagra Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Mortum Bagra a permanent resident of Lipu Bagra Village PO and PS Aalo West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Kemo Lollen, Arun Yun,Maryum Sora,Geli Taye,D Ado Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 25-06-2025 Heard Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D. Loyi, learned Page No.# 2/5 Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This criminal petition is filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for quashing and setting aside of the FIR dated 03.04.2023 registered in Aalo Women P.S. Case no. 02/2023 under Sections 448/354-D/323/427 of IPC as well as for quashing of the charge-sheet being C.S. No. 05/2023 and the trail proceedings registered as G.R. Case No. 16/2023, registered under the aforesaid sections, which is pending trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Aalo. 3. This is a joint petition filed by both the informant and the accused person. The petitioners have prayed for quashment of the aforesaid proceedings only on the ground that they have entered into a settlement by a deed of agreement, dated 06.10.2024. 4. The brief fact of the case as is revealed from the FIR is that the informant, who is the petitioner No. 1 herein, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Police Station Aalo, West Siang District stating inter alia that the accused person, the petitioner No. 2, had wrongfully entered into her rented house and destroyed her household articles and had also beaten her badly. The police registered the case under abovementioned sections and on completion of investigation, submitted a charge- sheet on 29.09.2023. Thereafter, the charge-sheet was placed before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Civil Judge (Senior Division), West Siang District, Aalo and the learned Court took cognizance of the offence on the basis of the police report, on 03.11.2023 and charges were also framed by the learned Court, on 28.01.2025, against the petitioner No. 2 under Sections 448/323/427/354-D of the IPC. Thereafter, the Trial proceeded and now it is at the stage of examination of the witnesses. 5. Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the story behind lodging of the FIR is that the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2 were in a relationship and that on 03.04.2023, during Mopin celebration, the petitioner No. 2 asked the petitioner No. 1 to leave the said festive ground as it became too late at Page No.# 3/5 night but when the petitioner No. 1 refused to leave, arguments took place between them, which lead to minor scuffles between them and thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 went to her rented house and the petitioner No. 2 went after her. On reaching the rented house, a heated arguments took place between them and the petitioner No. 2, in the heat of the moment, damaged some household articles. He further submitted, before this Court, that out of anger, the petitioner No. 1 lodged the FIR, alleging that the petitioner No. 2 wrongfully entered into her rented house, damaged the articles and beaten her badly. 6. Mr. Lollen, learned counsel has placed a medical certificate in respect of the petitioner No. 1, which is annexed as Annexure-2 series in the instant petition and the same reveals that no injury was found on the body of the petitioner No. 1. Mr. Lollen has also placed the deed of mutual settlement entered into between the petitioners, which is annexed as Annexure-4 to the petition and submitted that the parties have mutually settled the differences and agreed not to pursue the case any further. 7. On the other hand, Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor in his usual fairness submitted that FIR reflects that the instant case is personal to the accused and the informant and that the same would not have impact on society at large and as such, he submitted that he has no objection for quashing of the criminal proceedings, in the interest of justice. 8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. 9. It is seen that the issue involved in between the informant and the accused are personal. It is stated in the petition, more specifically, in Paragraph-3 of the petition that on 03.04.2023, during cultural program on the eve of the Mopin Festival Celebration at Aalo, the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 2 (the informant and the accused) were enjoying cultural show. When the petitioner No. 2 asked the petitioner No. 1 to leave the late-night program, as it was too late at night, the Page No.# 4/5 petitioner No. 1 refused to return and fought with the petitioner No. 2. It is the pleaded case of the petitioners that thereafter, at around 2:30 am, when the petitioner No. 1 went to her rented house, the petitioner No. 2 followed her and again they fought, which lead to minor scuffles and in the heat of the moment, damaged some household articles. It is also the pleaded case of the petitioner No. 1/the informant that the petitioner No. 2 had physically assaulted her. From the said facts, it can simply be deduced that out of anger, the petitioner No. 1 lodged the FIR before the Officer-in-Charge, Police Station Aalo, as stated above. 10. Although, it is stated in the FIR that the petitioner No. 2 had beaten the petitioner No. 1 badly, however, the medical examination report in respect of the petitioner No. 1, which was conducted immediately after lodging of the FIR, i.e. on 13.04.2023, reveals no injury on the body of the petitioner No. 1. 11. The deed of settlement entered into between the petitioner No. 1/the informant and the petitioner No. 2/the accused, which is annexed in the petition, also reveals that the petitioner No. 2 tendered unconditional apology for his behaviour to the petitioner No. 1 in presence of the family members of both the parties. It further reveals that the petitioner No. 1 had pardoned the petitioner No. 2. It is also stated that the petitioner No. 1, after the incident and before the deed of settlement, got married and is leaving a peaceful life. 12. It is a settled position of law, as held in various decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court such as in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Apex Court had observed that the High Court while quashing the criminal proceedings on settlement being arrived at between the parties, must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. It was held that the cases which involves heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity and offences such as murder, rape and dacoity etc. cannot be quashed even when the victim or victim’s family and the offender reaches a settlement. Further, the Apex Page No.# 5/5 Court has observed that the criminal cases which is civil in nature or in relation to family disputes or a commercial transaction, where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute between them, can be quashed. Same observations have been made in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbhatbhai Vs. the State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SSC 641 and in the case of the State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in (2019) 5 SSC 688. 13. It is clearly noticed in the instant case that the issue is personal in nature and is between the informant and the accused person and it is also seen that the instant petition is filed by the informant and the accused for quashment of the FIR, charge- sheet and the criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement. The Apex Court had also observed in the case of Gian Singh (supra) that where there is no chance of effective trial between the parties and there is no chance for conviction of the accused person, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings instituted against the accused person. 14. In view of the above, this Court in exercise of the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, quashes the FIR, dated 03.04.2023, in connection with Aalo Women P.S. Case no. 02/2023 under Sections 448/354-D/323/427 of IPC as well as the charge-sheet being C.S. No. 05/2023 submitted on 29.09.2023 and the subsequent criminal proceedings being registered as G.R. Case No. 16/2023, pending trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Siang District Aalo. 15. The criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant