Page No.# 1/5 GAHC040007412026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./128/2026 Smti Bengia Anju Tana and Anr Wife of Shri Tana Puna, resident of Lobi Colony, Itanagar, PO and PS Itanagar, Papum Pare District, (ICR) Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Lokam Solomon Age: Occupation : Son of Lokam Tanir resident of Sanglo Putung Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District (ICR) Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented through the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Bengia Arun, Tam Abo,T Pol,Tana Seth,Chera Natung,Nabam Rama,Tana Tony Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER Date : 25.05.2026 Heard Mr. Nabam Rama, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Addl. P.P., Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This criminal petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Page No.# 2/5 Sanhita(BNSS), 2023, has been jointly filed by the informant and the accused, praying for compounding/quashing of G.R. No. 698/2021 arising out of Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 107/2021, registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that the matrimonial dispute between them, has been amicably settled. 3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner No. 1 who is the then wife of the petitioner No. 2, lodged the First Information Report (FIR) against the accused who then was her husband(petitioner No. 2), on 04.08.2021, alleging, domestic violence against her. Based on the First Information Report(FIR), the aforesaid police case was registered. Upon completion of the investigation, the police had submitted charge-sheet into the matter against the petitioner No. 2 for commission of the alleged offence and the matter is now pending trial before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of the G.R. No. 698/2021 arising out of Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 107/2021; the informant and the accused have dissolved their marriage by mutual consent by way of decree of divorce which was granted by the Court of learned District Judge, Yupia, in T.S.(Divorce) No. 61/2022, vide order dated 21.11.2022, and since then, they both are now re-married and now living separately and peacefully with their respective spouses. Subsequently, the parties have also resolved all disputes including pending cases by executing a deed of mutual settlement on 25.01.2025, wherein, the informant has categorically stated that since she is separated from the accused-petitioner No. 2, and is now living peacefully and happily with another person as her husband; she has no further grievance against the petitioner No. 2(her the then husband) and she does not want to pursue the criminal proceeding any further. Page No.# 3/5 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the matter has been amicably resolved between the parties; the informant-petitioner No. 1 has no further grievance against the accused-petitioner No. 2, there is no scope of conviction in the case, as such, further proceeding of the case would be a futile exercise and it would only cause harassment to both the accused and the informant and therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays for compounding/quashing and setting aside of G.R. No. 698/2021 arising out of Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 107/2021 pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia. 6. Ms. Hage, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, fairly submits that since both the parties have mutually resolved their dispute and now, they are staying separately with their respective spouses, under such circumstances, there is no scope of conviction in the case and therefore, she has no objection if the prayer of the petitioners, is allowed. 7. I have heard the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the parties. 8. It appears that the dispute arose between the then wife(petitioner No. 1) and the then husband(petitioner No. 2) due to some matrimonial misunderstanding between them. The marital discord between them led to filing of a diorce case being T.S.(Divorce) No. 61/2022, by the petitioner No. 1, and the learned Court of District Judge, Yupia, vide order dated 21.11.2022, dissolved their marriage and granted them divorce. Subsequently, both the parties have re- married and now, separately living with their respective family, happily. They have also executed a mutual deed of settlement on 25.01.2025, wherein, the petitioner No. 1 has categorically stated that due to some matrimonial misunderstanding Page No.# 4/5 between the parties, she lodged a written complaint against the petitioner No. 2 resulting in registration of Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 107/2021, u/s. 498(A) IPC, and since both of them have been granted divorce by the learned District Court, Yupia, vide order dated 25.01.2025, in T.S.(Divorce) No. 61/2022, and as they have now remarried to other persons and are living happily and peacefully with their respective spouses; under the circumstances, it appears that the dispute, in question, is purely personal in nature and has arisen out of a marital discord between the then husband-petitioner No. 2 and the then wife-petitioner No. 1. It also appears that the dispute does not affect the society at large. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, there appears to have been only a remote possibility of conviction and thus, if the proceeding is allowed to be continued; it would only cause harassment to both the parties which would rather amount to an abuse of the process of law. 9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan & ors., reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 held that the High Court in exercise of inherent power conferred under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, can quash the criminal proceedings even for non-compoundable offences which are private in nature and do no have serious impact on society on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender. 10. 10. In the light of the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & anr., reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh & ors. v. State of Punjab & anr., reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, as well as in the case of Laxmi Narayan (supra), wherein the Court has permitted quashing of the proceedings even in non-compoundable offence in cases involved in private disputes which do not affect the society at large, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case where inherent power under Section 482 of the Code Page No.# 5/5 of Criminal Procedure, 1973/528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, should be exercised to secure the ends of justice. 11. Accordingly, the proceedings in G.R. No. 698/2021 arising out of Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 107/2021, registered under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code, in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, against the petitioner No. 2 Shri Lokam Solomon, are hereby quashed. 12. In terms of the above, the instant joint petition filed by the petitioners under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant