Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 19 July, 2025
Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010153062025
2025:GAU-AS:9291
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./836/2025
JINIFA AHMED AND ANR
W/O- AKIR HUSSAIN.
R/O- VILL.- BANGALIPARA PT-I, P.S.- BILASIPARA, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM.
2: AKIR HUSSAIN @ AKHIR HUSSAIN.
S/O- SAHADAT ALI.
R/O- VILL.- BANGALI PARA PT-I
P.S.- BILASIPARA
DIST.- DHUBRI
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM.
2:JAKIR HUSSAIN
S/O- LATE BABUR ALI.
R/O- VILL.- BANGALI PARA PT-II
P.S.- BILASIPARA
DIST.- DHUBRI
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A AHMED, A. AHMED,U U KHAN,MR. M A CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/4
:: BEFORE ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
O R D E R
19.07.2025
Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also
heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing
FIR of Bilasipara P.S. Case No.74/2024.
3. The Respondent No.2 being the father, had lodged an FIR before police alleging
that his daughter below 18 years of age but above 17 years, was maintaining
relationship with the second petitioner Akhir Hussain. They even had sexual
relationship.
4. Police registered the case being Bilasipara P.S. Case No.74/2024 under Sections
376(1) of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
5. Now, both Akhir Hussain and the girl, now aged about 19 years have come
together to this Court stating that they are now married and living peacefully. Both of
them have prayed for quashing the FIR for the sake of their future.
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 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
Page No.# 3/4
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
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 under the given
circumstances, there is no possibility of conviction of any person in this case. So,
allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court would be nothing
but an abuse of the process of the court.
9. This Court is the opinion that this is a fit case for exercising power under Section
528 of the BNSS, 2023. The criminal petition is allowed.
Page No.# 4/4
10. The criminal proceedings arising out of FIR of Bilasipara P.S. Case No.74/2024, is
quashed and set aside.
The criminal petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
