Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13465 (GAU)

MD AFJALUR RAHMAN v. MD SHAMIM AHMED AND ANR

Crl.Pet./1200/2026 · 2026-08-30

Shamima Jahan

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010182392026 2026:GAU-AS:12598 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1200/2026 MD AFJALUR RAHMAN S/O ABU BAKKAR SIDDIQUE R/O PACHIM SINGIMARI P/SRUPAHIHAT DIST NAGAON C/O COMMANDENT 13 THE APBN LILABARI DISTRICT LAKHIMPUR VERSUS MD SHAMIM AHMED AND ANR S/O - LT. ABU BAKKAR R/O -PUB SINGIMARI P/S - RUPAHIHAT DIST- NAGAON ASSAM 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED. GOVT. P Advocate for the Petitioner : DARAK ULLAH, MS. S T NESSA,DEBAKSHI BORA,MS A HUSSAIN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 31.08.2026 Heard Mr S Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr R J Baruah, Page No.# 2/4 learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam/respondent No. 2. 2. By this application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 22.12.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon, in Criminal Revision No. 21(N)/2025, by which the revision petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed for want of prosecution. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a complaint case was lodged by the complainant before the learned Additional CJM, Nagaon, and the same was registered as NI Case No 23 of 2023, under Section 138 of the NI Act. During the proceeding, by order dated 28.04.2023, the learned Court of Additional CJM, Nagaon, had taken cognizance for the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, against the petitioner. The petitioner had challenged the said order of cognizance before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon, by filing a criminal revision petition being Criminal Revision Petition No. 21 (N) of 2025. The learned counsel further submits that the said revisional Court by order dated 22.12.2025, had dismissed the same for want of prosecution. He submits that the petitioner was absent on two dates and the revisional Court had dismissed the case for want of prosecution. He also submits that case records were called for by the revisional Court and the same was also Page No.# 3/4 not received on that day and the case was dismissed. 4. Mr R J Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that there is no infirmity in the order of the revisional Court dated 22.12.2025, since the petitioner was not only absent on one date, but on two consecutive dates. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels and I have gone through the records. 6. It is seen that the revisional Court had ordered for receipt of the TCRs for consideration of the revisional application. However, the same was not received on the date when the dismissal order was passed. The petitioner was found absent on two consecutive dates, and it was stated by the revisional Court that the petitioner remained absent on the last occasion and that the petitioner had remained absent on the said date, i.e., on 22.12.2025 too, but, the observation of the revisional Court that the petitioner remained absent for a prolonged period of time, is not a fact of the case. As such, this Court finds it fit to direct the revisional Court, i.e., the Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon, to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to appear and contest the case. As such, the Criminal Revision Petition No. 21 (N) of 2025 be revived before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon. It is also observed that if the Page No.# 4/4 petitioner is again found absent when the case is listed, no further adjournment would be given to him and the learned revisional Court would pass order(s) as it deems necessary. 7. With this observation, the order dated 22.12.2025, passed by the revisional Court, is set aside and quashed. 8. It is further directed that the petitioner will go and appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 3, Nagaon, with the order of this Court, within a period of 7 (seven) days from the date of this order. 9. The Criminal Petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant