Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2025 Latest Caselaw 98 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 2 May, 2025

Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia

Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia

                                                              Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010080492025




                                                        2025:GAU-AS:5381

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

                         Case No. : Crl.Pet./444/2025

         IMAN ALI AND ANR
         SON OF ISMAIL ALI
         VILL- NO. 1 MAUZADAR GAON
         P.O. NAKHUTI,
         P.S. LUMDING,
         DIST. HOJAI, ASSAM,
         PIN- 782446

         2: RAIHANA BEGUM
          W/O IMAN ALI
         D/O ASKAR ALI
         VILL- NO. 1 MAUZADAR GAON
         P.O. NAKHUTI
          P.S.LUMDING
         DIST. HOJAI
         ASSAM

         PIN-78244

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
         REP BY THE PP, ASSAM

         2:SHIRAZUL ISLAM
          SECRETARY
          NAKHUTI GAON PANCHAYAT
          P.O. NAKHUTI
          P.S. LUMDING

         DIST. HOJAI
         ASSAM

         PIN-78244
                                                                           Page No.# 2/4


Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR H R A CHOUDHURY, MR M Z RAHMAN,MR J ABEDIN

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,




                                      :: BEFORE ::
                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA


                                      O R D E R

02.05.2025

Heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.I. Hussain, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.

2. This is a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, praying for quashing the criminal proceedings of Lumding P.S. Case No.158/2024 (G.R. No.2606/2024) under Sections 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 R/W Section 6/17 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

3. On 21.12.2024, the Respondent No.2 being a strange, had lodged an FIR before police that about 4 years prior filing of the said FIR, the first petitioner, now aged about 24 years had married the second petitioner, now aged about 21 years. Accordingly, police registered the Lumding P.S. Case No.158/2024 under Sections 9, 10 and 11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 read with Section 6 and 17 of the POCSO Act, 2012.

4. Now, both the petitioners have come together to this Court admitting that the second petitioner was below 18 years of age at the time of marriage. But she has been living peacefully with the first petitioner and the couple has been blessed with two children. The second petitioner has submitted that continuation of the criminal Page No.# 3/4

proceeding against her husband would be detrimental to her future and her children. Therefore, she prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings against her husband.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.

6. 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 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 Page No.# 4/4

vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge."

7. This Court is of the opinion that the ratio laid down in Bajan Lal (supra), is applicable in the present case. Since, the so-called victim girl has come forward to state that she has been living happily with her husband and children. She further claims that she is now a major. She has filed the birth certificates of her two children.

8. In such a circumstance, this Court is again of the opinion that there is no possibility of conviction of anybody in future in this case. Thus, allowing such a criminal proceeding to continue before a trial court would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court.

9. This is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. The criminal petition is allowed.

10. Accordingly, the criminal proceedings of Lumding P.S. Case No.158/2024 (G.R. No.2606/2024) under Sections 9/10/11 of the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006 R/W Section 6/17 of the POCSO Act, 2012, is quashed and set aside.

The Criminal Petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant