Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4279 (GAU)

HOMESWAR DAS v. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR

Crl.Pet./453/2026 · 2026-03-26

Parthivjyoti Saikia

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010061842026 2026:GAU-AS:4416 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./453/2026 HOMESWAR DAS SON OF LATE RATNESAR DAS RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 55, BATAHGHULI, PANJABARI NEAR GANESH MANDIR, P.O. PANJABARI,P.S. SATGAON, GUWAHATI-781037, IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI PRADIP CHOUDHURY S/OLATE CHANDRA MOHAN CHOUDHURY RESIDENT OF PRASANTA RESIDENCY FLAT NO. A1 HARBALA PATH BYE LANE NO. 2 BORA SERVICE ULUBARI GUWAHATI SUB P.O. ULUBARI DIST. KAMRUP (METRO) ASSAM PIN-781007. MOBILE NO. 700243802 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K R BORA, MR. D K BORAH,R GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 27.03.2026 Heard Mr. K.R. Bora, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Bhaskar Sharma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing proceedings of N.I. Case No.3587/2023 pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S) No.2, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati. 3. The Respondent No.2 filed the complaint case against the present petitioner after a cheque issued by the petitioner was dishonoured by the Bank. 4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel Mr. Bora. 5. In paragraph 103 of the State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: “103. We also give a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act according to its whim or caprice.” 6. A criminal proceeding cannot be nipped in the bud. Whatever issues the Page No.# 3/3 petitioner wants to raise, may be raised before the trial court. This is not a fit case for exercising the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. Therefore, the criminal petition is dismissed and disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant