Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010087162026 2026:GAU-AS:6548 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./623/2026 DIPANKAR PAUL AND ANR S/O SHRI SHYMAL CH PAUL, R/O HOUSE NO 16, PULIN NIVAS,MILANPUR, REHABARI, PS PALTANBAZAR, DIST KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN 781020 2: RINKI MAZUMDAR PAUL W/O DIPANKAR PAUL R/O HOUSE NO 16 PULIN NIVAS MILANPUR REHABARI PS PALTANBAZAR DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM PIN 78102 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORTHAKUR, MS. S KAKATI,R DEB Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA O R D E R 13.05.2026 Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Bidhyut Sarma, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam representing the State. 2. This a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the proceedings of PRC Case No.2199/2024 under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati. 3. Both the petitioners herein are husband and wife. On 11.08.2022, the wife lodged an FIR before police alleging that for the last several years she was mentally and physically tortured by her husband and her mother-in-law. On many occasions, she informed the All Women Police Station. Three/four days prior to lodging of this FIR, her husband physically assaulted her and took away some documents and also the key of the bank locker along with some jewellery. Therefore, on 07.04.2022, she informed police at Paltan Bazar. Police tried to interfere. In spite of that, on 10.04.2022, she was physically tortured by her husband, mother-in-law and brother- in-law. One day prior to lodging of this present FIR, she even called up the All Women Police Station. 4. On the day of lodging the FIR, her son came home from hostel. Her husband assaulted her and put some tablets into her mouth. Page No.# 3/4 5. Now, both the husband and wife have come together to this Court stating that they have patched up and prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings arising out of the FIR lodged by the wife. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides. 7. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC (now Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 ) has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 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 Page No.# 4/4 provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (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.” 8. Reverting to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that since both the husband and wife have settled their disputes, there is no possibility of future conviction of anybody in this case. So, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trail court would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. 9. This Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. The criminal petition is allowed. 10. Accordingly, the proceedings of PRC Case No.2199/2024 under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, are quashed and set aside. The Criminal Petition is disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant