Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010270272025 2026:GAU-AS:8705 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1542/2025 ALTAB ALI S/OKARAMAT ALI, A RESIDENT OF VILL.- JANATAPUR, P.S.- MERAPANI, DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:KASHYAB GOGOI S/O- MOHEN GOGOI A RESIDENT OF VILL. GOMARIGURI P.O.- GOMARIGURI P.S.- MERAPANI DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM PIN-78570 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M A I HUSSAIN, MR. S. ALOM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR N Z CHOUDHURY(R2) BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 17.06.2026. Heard Mr. M.I. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Baishya, learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing on behalf of the State Page No.# 2/5 respondent No.1 and Mr. N.Z. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2/informant. 2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 for quashing of the FIR dated 13.08.2025 being registered as the Merapani P.S. Case No.66/2025, under Section 318(4)/319(2)/ 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, corresponding to G.R. Case No.449/2025 along with entire criminal proceedings, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class No.2, Golaghat. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Hussain, the learned counsel that it is a fact that the brother of the petitioner namely, one Mahtab Ali purchased the vehicle (dumper) bearing Regn. No.AS 05 AC 1383, from the informant and in pursuant to that some amount of money was also earlier paid to the petitioner but due to some disputes regarding the preparation of some documents and monetary transactions, the FIR has been filed against the petitioner due to mistaken identity, though he is not the person who purchased the vehicle from the informant and it is his brother who purchased the same. But subsequently during the pendency of the investigation of the police case, there was an amicable settlement between the parties i.e. between the informant as well as the brother of the petitioner, namely, Mahtab Ali and in pursuant to the said agreement, the brother of the petitioner already returned the vehicle and the informant also returned back the money which he had earlier received towards the value of the vehicle. 4. Presently, there are no grievances/disputes between the parties. Further, the informant also sworn an affidavit stating that he lodged the FIR in Merapani Police Station against the present petitioner but at present, but at present he is Page No.# 3/5 not willing to proceed with the case, as the matter has been mutually settled between the parties outside the Court. 5. Mr. Hussain, the learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly submitted that considering the compromise between the parties vis-à-vis the agreement between the informant and the brother of the petitioner and other aspects of the case, it is a fit case wherein the entire criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.449/2025, including the FIR as well as the charge sheet may be set aside and quashed by invoking the power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. 6. Mr. Choudhury, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2/informant also admitted that there was an agreement between the brother of the petitioner as well as the informant and in pursuant to the said agreement, the informant had received back the vehicle and in the same time, the informant also returned back the money, which he had received from the brother of the petitioner. At present, there is no dispute between them and hence, the informant also does not want to proceed with the case further and accordingly, submitted that the informant has no objection if the entire criminal proceeding against the present petitioner is set aside and quashed. 7. Mr. Baishya, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that as the parties have mutually agreed for the settlement, the State has no objection in that regard. That apart, Section 319(2) and 351(3) of the BNS, 2023 are also compoundable in nature and the other Section i.e. Section 318(4) of the BNS, 2023 is also compoundable with leave of the Court. Mr. Baishya accordingly submitted that the State has no objection in that regard. Page No.# 4/5 8. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and also considering the annexure filed along with the petition, specially the agreement for settlement as well as the affidavit sworn by the informant and also the submissions made by the parties, it is seen that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and in pursuant to that settlement, the informant also received back the vehicle in question and at the same time, the brother of the petitioner with whom the agreement was made had also received back the money which was given to the informant at the time of purchasing the vehicle. 9. Thus it is seen that the case is of purely private in nature wherein the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement. It is also seen that as the informant is not interested to proceed with the case further, the possibility of conviction is also very bleak and remote, even if the proceeding is allowed to be continued further. 10. In the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 29 has expressed the view that in criminal cases having overwhelming and predominantly civil character, particularly arising out of commercial transactions or matrimonial relationship or family disputes, which are purely private in nature, can be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves and if the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the continuation of the criminal case would cause prejudice to the accused and injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case. 11. 11. Considering all theses aspects of the case vis-à-vis the compromise between the parties and also the view expressed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Narayan and others (Supra), this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit Page No.# 5/5 case, wherein the extraordinary power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 can be applied, for setting aside and quashing the entire criminal proceeding, including the FIR as well as the charge sheet. 12. Accordingly, the FIR dated 13.08.2025 being registered as the Merapani P.S. Case No.66/2025, under Section 318(4)/319(2)/ 351(3) of the BNS, 2023, corresponding to G.R. Case No.449/2025 along with entire criminal proceedings, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class No.2, Golaghat are hereby set aside and quashed. 13. This criminal petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant