Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040004572026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./78/2026 Gumsaw Sikhet and 7 Ors Son of Shri Tangbow Sikhet, resident of Village Bordumsa, Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Samra Mura Age: Occupation : Son of Late Kumra Mura resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Smti Kopi Sikhet Age: Occupation : Wife of Shri Samra Mura resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. 4: Dugong Wakhet Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Ladin Wakhet resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. 5: Chandan Baruah Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Komol Baruah resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. Page No.# 2/6 6: Smti Dipmala Manjang Singpho Age: Occupation : Wife of Shri Chandan Baruah resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. 7: Dui Doji Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Gumdo Doji resident of Village Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh. 8: Nongseng Umbon Age: Occupation : Son of Shri Padmo Umbon resident of Village Wakhetna PO and PS Bordumsa Changlang District Arunachal Pradesh VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : Rajesh Sonar, Meenakshi Jerang,Kipa Tagar,Gautam Natung,Khyoda Yayo,M Basar,Michi Khambo,Binny Nyaruce,R Taku Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, Page No.# 3/6 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG ORDER 29.06.2026 Heard Mr. R. Sonar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. L. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed jointly by petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 (the victims/informants) and petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 (the accused), praying for setting aside and quashing G.R. Case No. 211/2025 arising out of Bordumsa P.S. Case No. 11/2025, registered under Sections 118(2)/74/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Changlang. 3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are that, on 12.12.2025, petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 lodged a First Information Report (FIR) against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 alleging that they had assaulted them with weapons, as a result of which they sustained severe head injuries. Accordingly, the aforesaid police station case was registered and investigated. Upon completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge- sheet dated 03.02.2026 against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 for the offences punishable under Sections 118(1)/74/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS. Thereafter, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Changlang, took cognizance of the offences, and the matter is presently pending for trial before the said Court. 4. Mr. Sonar, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that, during the pendency of the trial, the matter has been amicably settled between the victims and the accused persons by executing a Deed of Compromise and Settlement dated 28.12.2025. The accused/petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 have tendered an unconditional apology to the victims/petitioner Nos. 1 to 6, which has been Page No.# 4/6 accepted by them in view of their long-standing family and community ties. The learned counsel further submits that the injury reports reveal that the injuries sustained by the victims/petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 are simple in nature. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, since the matter has been amicably settled and the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the proceedings against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 deserve to be quashed by invoking the powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 6. Ms. Hage, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, fairly submits that, having regard to the nature of the injuries sustained by the victims, which are simple in nature, the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties through the Deed of Compromise and Settlement dated 28.12.2025, and the fact that petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 no longer wish to pursue the matter, she has no objection if the prayer of the petitioners is allowed. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and have also perused the materials available on record. 8. The present case arose out of an unfortunate incident that occurred in the heat of the moment. Consequently, the FIR came to be lodged and the criminal proceedings were initiated against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8. However, during the pendency of the trial, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and differences. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6, who are the informants/victims, have categorically stated that they have no further grievance against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 and do not wish to pursue the prosecution any further. The matter has been settled with the intervention of the elders and community leaders, and the Page No.# 5/6 parties have agreed to resolve the dispute amicably in the interest of maintaining peace, harmony, and their long-standing family and community relationships. The injury reports also reveal that the injuries sustained by the victims/informants are simple in nature. 9. Having regard to the nature of the dispute, the settlement arrived at between the parties, and the fact that the dispute is essentially personal in nature without any adverse impact on society at large, this Court is of the considered view that the possibility of securing a conviction against petitioner Nos. 7 & 8 is remote and bleak. In such circumstances, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of law. 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688 held that the High Court in exercise of power under 482 of the Code can quashed the criminal proceeding even for non-compoundable offences which are private in nature and do not have serious impact on society on the ground that there is settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender. 11. In light of the principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in[(2012) 10 SCC 303], Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab reported in[(2014) 6 SCC 466], as well as the State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan (supra), where the Apex Court has permitted quashing of 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 Cr.P.C/Section 528 of BNSS, should be exercised to secure the ends of justice. Page No.# 6/6 12. Accordingly, the proceedings in G.R. Case No. 211/2025, arising out of Bordumsa P.S. Case No. 11/2025, and the charge-sheet, vide C.S. No. 01/2026 dated 03.02.2026, registered under Sections 118(1)/74/351(3)/3(5) of the BNS, pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Changlang, against the accused, Shri Dui Doji (petitioner No. 7) and Shri Nongseng Umbon (petitioner No. 8), are hereby quashed in the interest of justice. 13. With the above, this petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant