Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010040582023 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./212/2023 RUBUL ALI @ RUBUL KHANDAKAR S/O KHANDAKAR HASEM ALI VILL- KUMULLIPARA P.O. JOSHIHATIPARA, P.S. HOWLY DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:JULHAS ALI S/O LATE HAKIM ALI VILL- KUMULLIPARA P.O. JOSHIHATIPARA P.S. HOWLY DIST. BARPETA ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI, H A AHMED,MR R. ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR M Z SHAH (R-2) BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA ORDER Date : 30.04.2025 Heard Mr. R Ali, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also Page No.# 2/3 heard Mr. P Borthakur, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam as well as Mr. M Z Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. 2. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for quashing and setting aside the further proceeding of Special POCSO Case No. 114/2022 arising out of Howly P S Case No 106/2022. 3. On 17.07.2022, the respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR before police alleging that on 06.03.2022, at about 10 PM, when his wife went out of the house to attend the call of the nature, the present petitioner entered into their house and attempted to commit sexual offence upon his 16 years old daughter. The girl raised hue and cry over the incident. The petitioner was apprehended. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 have submitted that both sides have settled the dispute between themselves and the respondent No. 2 does not want to proceed further with the case. To that effect, the daughter of the informant/respondent No. 2 had even sworn an affidavit before the Notary Public at Barpeta stating that her father had lodged the FIR on the basis of a fabricated information. She claimed that the present petitioner is an innocent person. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides. 6. This Court of the opinion that under the given circumstances of the case, there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioner in the present case. Therefore, allowing the proceeding to continue against the present petitioner would be nothing, but rather, it would be abuse of the process of law. Page No.# 3/3 7. Therefore, the criminal petition is allowed. The proceeding of Special POCSO Case No. 114/2022 arising out of Howly P S Case No 106/2022 pending in the court of the learned Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Barpeta is quashed and set aside. With the aforesaid direction, the criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant