Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010031162025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./213/2025 JITEN SARMA S/O LATE SATYA NATH SARMA, R/O GHORAMARA, CHANDAN NAGAR, PRAGATI NAGAR, P.S.-HATIGAON, GUWWHATI-781038, DIST- KAMRUP (M) VERSUS HOME DECOR REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, MD. SAKHAWAT HUSSAIN, SITUATED AT GANESHGURI, R.P. ROAD, P.S- DISPUR, GUWAHATI-781006, DIST- KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B SARMAH, MR. K KASHYAP,MR T MAZUMDAR Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 25.02.2025 1. Heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Jiten Sarma impugning the order dated 14.07.2027 passed by the learned Judicial Page No.# 2/3 Magistrate 1st Class Kamrup (Metro) in C. R. Case No.1525/2017 whereby cognizance under Section 138/142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was taken on the basis of complaint filed by the respondent. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a complaint has been filed under Section 138/142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the respondent claiming himself to be a proprietor of Home Decor. However, no documentary evidence has been produced before the Court to show that the respondent is the proprietor of the Home Decor. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner does not have any legally enforceable debt against the respondent. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the complaint case is presently pending at the stage for examination of accused after completion of the prosecution witness. 6. I have considered the statements made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the materials available on record. 7. It is no longer res integra that the inherent powers of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 shall have to be exercised sparingly in rare cases where there is manifest with circumspection in rarest of rare cases. 8. Further, while examining a complaint quashing of which has sought, Court cannot embark upon an equity as to the reliably or genuineness or otherwise of the allegation made in the complaint. 9. In the instant, the impugned order of cognizance has been passed by the Trial Court way back in the year 2017 and the trial has fairly progressed the petitioner has approached this Court after about 5 years of the date of taking cognizance, which in itself disentitles him to get any the relief in this Criminal Petition. Page No.# 3/3 10. This Court is of the considered opinion that the facts of this case are not such as would cause miscarriage of justice if the inherent powers under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is not exercised. 11. This Court is therefore, of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case where inherent powers of this Court may be exercised. 12. Hence, without issuing notice to the respondents this Criminal Petition is dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant