Page No.# 1/5 GAHC020004392026 2026:GAU-NL:407 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : Crl. Pet./19/2026 SHRI KANOKA KITS S/O VIYISHE, R/O HOUSE NO. 32-B, ELECTRICAL COLONY, FULL NAGARJAN, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND ANR P.P. NAGALAND 2:CHANDRABAHADUR CHAPAGAIN S/O LATE BANISHOR CHAPAGAIN R/O HOUSE NO. 843 LANE 25 GRACE COLONY KUDA VILLAGE C KHEL DIMAPUR NAGALAND Advocate for the Petitioner : TUNATO YEPTHO, OTOLI KITS Advocate for the Respondent : P.P, NAGALAND, BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 24.07.2026 The instant petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been Page No.# 2/5 filed praying for quashing of the FIR and criminal proceedings relating to GR Case No. 143/2026 arising out of Dimapur East Police Station Case No. 56/2026 under Section 109(1), 115(2) of the BNS, 2023 on the ground that the Victim/Respondent No. 2/Complainant and the Petitioner/Accused have already arrived at a compromise settlement during the pendency of the investigation. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, Ms. Otoli Kits. Also heard learned Public Prosecutor, Ms. S. Mere, for the State of Nagaland as well as learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2, Ms. Suli Achumi. 3. The facts leading to the filing of the instant petition is that on 18.03.2026 at around 8:30 to 9:00PM an altercation broke out between the Petitioner/Accused and the Respondent No. 2/Complainant escalating to a physical assault, when the Respondent No. 2/Complainant was at his friend’s place for dinner. After the dinner, while the Respondent No.2/Complainant was leaving, a scuffle broke out between the Petitioner and the Complainant purely out of a misunderstanding. Thereafter, the Respondent No.2/Complainant lodged an FIR before the Dimapur East Police Station and in this connection a case was registered as Dimapur East PS Case No. 56/2026 corresponding to GR Case No. 143/2026 under Section 109(1) and 115(2) of the BNS. 4. During the investigation the Respondent No.2/Complainant voluntarily approached the Petitioner’s parents to settle the issues stating that the offences committed by the Petitioner were unintentional and that the FIR was lodged due to a misunderstanding. The Respondent Page No.# 3/5 No.2/Complainant also swore an affidavit stating that he no longer wishes to pursue the case against the Petitioner and vide compromise/settlement affidavit on 27.03.2026, the parties settled the matter amicably between themselves. It is also stated that Charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant case and the matter is now before the learned Trial Court. 5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner/Accused relies on the case of Naushey Ali & Ors v. State of U.P. & Anr. in SLP Criminal No. 3432/2023, wherein by order dated 11.02.2025, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that a non-compoundable offence can be quashed on the basis of compromise if the facts do not support the charge; thus holding that a mere mention of the offence in an FIR does not bar quashing it. Hence the learned counsel prays that the inherent power under Section 528 of this Court may be invoked to quash the FIR registered before the Dimapur East Police Station Case No. 56/2026 and also the consequential criminal proceedings in GR Case No. 143/2026. 6. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.2/Complainant has also appeared and submitted that the Respondent No. 2 has no objection regarding the prayer made by the Petitioner in the instant petition. 7. Learned Public Prosecutor, Ms. S. Mere, while not disputing that the criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court in the present petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, prays that cost may be imposed on the parties as the criminal machinery had been set in motion and the investigating agency had already invested time and efforts in investigating the case and in filing the Charge-Sheet. Page No.# 4/5 8. This Court has considered the submission of the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the pleadings. The Trial Court Records have also been received and the same has been perused in detail. 9. This Court has also perused the settlement affidavit dated 27.03.2026. In the settlement affidavit the Respondent No. 2 has sworn an affidavit that he is the Complainant/Victim in GR Case No. 143/2026 and that he had lodged the FIR on 18.03.2026 against the Petitioner/Accused. It is also stated in the said affidavit that he has no objections if the FIR and all the consequential proceedings are closed by the Court against the accused person and it is further stated that the compromise declaration is in the best interest of all the parties in order to maintain peace and harmony and he does not wish to pursue the case further. This Court has also observed that the said statement of the Respondent No.2/Complainant has been made without any fear, pressure or coercion. 10. In view of the facts and circumstances as stated above it is observed by this Court that it would be a futile exercise to continue with the criminal proceedings in the instant case as the same would not result in a conviction. Accordingly, the FIR dated 18.03.2026 as well as the consequential proceedings in GR Case No. 143/2026 is quashed and set aside subject to the condition that the Petitioner and the Respondent No. 2 shall deposit an amount of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with the Registry of this Court. Upon such deposit, the said amount shall be released to the High Court Bar Association. Page No.# 5/5 11. With the above directions, the instant petition stands disposed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant