Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010031092025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./187/2025 SRI PANKAJ BORGOHAIN S/O SRI LUHIT BORGOHAIN R/O NO. 1 NIRMOLIA GAON P.S. KAKOTIBARI DIST. CHARAIDEO,ASSAM PIN-785691 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SRI HORESH BORUAH S/O SRI PURNESWAR BORUAH R/O NO. 1 NIRMOLIA GAON P.S. KAKOTIBARI DIST. CHARAIDEO ASSAM PIN-78569 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR H P GUWALA, MR. A BORO Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 04.03.2025 Heard Mr. H.P. Gowala, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for quashing the proceedings of Special POCSO Case No.20/2024 arising out of Kakotibari P.S. Case No.09/2023 pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Charaideo, Assam. 3. On 02.02.2023, the informant lodged an FIR before police alleging that the present petitioner had married a minor girl. It is further alleged that the families of the boy and the girl never opposed the said marriage. 4. After investigation, police filed the charge sheet under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 6/17 of the POCSO Act, read with Sections 9, 10, 11 and 17 of the Prevention of Child Marriage Act, 2006. 5. By filing the present petition, the petitioner has submitted that he loved the girl and accordingly married her. He has submitted that since marriage, he has been living peacefully with the girl. 6. On the other hand, the girl lodged an FIR before police stating that though she was minor at the time of marriage with the petitioner, she is now major. She further submits that she was in love with the petitioner and therefore, she married him. According to the girl, both the families have no objection in her marriage with the petitioner. She submits that she has been living peacefully with the present petitioner. Page No.# 3/4 She also prayed for quashing the proceedings against the petitioner, who is now her husband. 7. I have given my anxious considerations to the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides in the light of the materials available before me. 8. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. BhajanLal, 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 provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. Page No.# 4/4 (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.” 9. Reverting to the case in hand, since the victim girl herself has admitted that she married the petitioner because of her love for him, this Court is of the opinion that there is no possibility of future conviction of the petitioner. Under this circumstance, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court, would be noting but an abuse of the process of the court. 10. This is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. Therefore, the criminal petition is allowed. 11. Accordingly, the proceedings of Special POCSO Case No.20/2024 arising out of Kakotibari P.S. Case No.09/2023 pending in the court of learned Special Judge, Charaideo, Assam, is quashed and set aside. The criminal petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant