Tiken Kalita @ Mithun vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 732 Gua

                                                                                Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010012172021




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                  Case No. : Crl.Pet./53/2021

            TIKEN KALITA @ MITHUN
            S/O SRI CHANDRADHAR KALITA, R/O VILL-BARTARI, P.S.-CHHAYGAON,
            DIST-KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN-781122



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
            REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

            2:SMTI. DAMOYANTI NATH
            W/O SRI DEBEN NATH
             R/O VILL-BARTARI
             P.S.-CHHAYGAON
             DIST-KAMRUP
            ASSAM
             PIN-78112

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR. J C GOGOI

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                           ORDER

Date : 01-03-2021

Heard the learned counsel Mr. B. Islam appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.J.

Page No.# 2/3

Dutta, the learned Addl. P.P. for the State of Assam.

This is an application u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying for quashing the FIR dated 24.07.2020 registered as Chhaygaon P.S. Case No. 718 of 2020 u/s 417 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

The FIR in this case discloses that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with the daughter of the informant but the knowledge of the said fact was not known to anyone. Even the victim girl did not inform her parents. The matter came to light when the girl became seven months pregnant. Then the girl told her parents that on a promise of marriage the petitioner had sexually intercourse with her and later on backed out on his promise.

The power u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be used in exceptional cases. This power of the High Court is used to prevent abuse of the process of the Court and for achieving ends of justice.

Mr. B.J. Dutta has referred to the settled position of law pertaining to use of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Mr. Islam, on the other hand, has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court that was rendered in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and Another, reported in (2019) SCC 608.

By supporting this judgment Mr. Islam submitted that the victim was a consenting party to the act of the petitioner and therefore there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioner.

I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties. I have already stated herein before that the power u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used for preventing abuse of the process of the Court and for advancing the cause of justice. This power is not meant to cut-short an ordinary criminal proceeding. Moreover the power u/s 482 is not meant to transgress into the domain of the powers of the criminal court constituted under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Whether the victim was a consenting party, it can be proved only by evidence. Whether the petitioner had sexually intercoursed with the victim girl on a promise of marriage, this can also be found out only by way of evidence.

Under the aforesaid premised reasons, this Court is of the opinion that this is not a fit Page No.# 3/3

case for exercising power u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C.

Therefore, the petition u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner is dismissed and disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant