[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 10 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010207742025
2026:GAU-AS:1782
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./1137/2025
JYOTIPAL BORAH AND 3 ORS.
R/O- H NO. 155, NEAR SUKRESWAR MANDIR, PO AND PS PANBAZAR, DIS-
KAMRUP (METRO), ASSAM, PIN- 781001
2: SHRI UTPAL NATH
S/O LATE GOURANGA CH. NATH
R/O HOUSE NO. 155
NEAR SUKRESWAR MANDIR P.O. AND P.S. PANBAZAR
DIST. KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM PIN-781001.
3: SMTI. PUNYATAMA NATH
SON OF LATE KHIRESWAR BORAH
R/O HOUSE NO. 155
NEAR SUKRESWAR MANDIR
P.O.AND P.S. PANBAZAR
DIST. KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM PIN-781001.
4: SMT. KANIKA NATH BORAH
R/O HOUSE NO. 155
NEAR SUKRESWAR MANDIR
P.O.AND P.S. PANBAZAR
DIST. KAMRUP (M0
ASSAM PIN-781001
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
2:SMT. BANASMITA NATH (INFORMANT)
RESIDENT OF PANJABARI
NAMGHAR PATH
Page No.# 2/5
P.S. DISPUR DIST. KAMRUP ()M)
ASSAM PIN-78103
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR W R MEDHI, MR P TALUKDAR,MR A V SINGH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. S I AHMED (R-2),MD. A CHOUDHURY (R-
2),MR. R YASIN (R-2)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
ORDER
Date : 10.02.2026
Heard Mr. W. R. Medhi, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.
R Yasin, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 and Mr. K. Baishya, learned
Addl. PP, Assam.
2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR as well
as charge sheet and the subsequent proceeding, pending before the Court of
learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum- Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup (M),
Guwahati in Sessions (Spl) Case No. 111/2025.
3. The petitioner has mainly prayed for quashing of the said FIR and the
proceedings on the ground of settlement reached amongst the parties i.e., the
complainant and the accused persons. In the present petition, the petitioner has
annexed the affidavit sworn in by the informant by which the informant had
clearly stated that she had filed the FIR due to some miscommunication and on
the instigation made by some third party. In the said affidavit, the informant had
also stipulated that whatever her four year child had stated in her statement
Page No.# 3/5
before the Magistrate was all due to the innocence as well as her daughter
spoke whatever she picked up as facts from her mother.
4. Although in the instant petition, the copy of the affidavit was annexed,
however, this Court deemed it fit to direct the informant to file an affidavit as to
whether the contents of the said affidavit were correct and it was sworn by the
informant and pursuant to the said direction, the informant has filed an affidavit
on 07.02.2026, by which it was stated on oath that the informant has lodged
the FIR out of her mistaken belief and that after lodging the FIR, she
understood the misunderstandings that prevailed amongst the family members
including the serious repercussions that has been brought into the peaceful life
of her husband's immediate relatives, arising out of her action taken in heat of
the moment. She has also stated that her daughter due to her tender age
could not understand the gravity of the seriousness of the allegation, which is
wholly based on misinterpretation of fact and stated the same before the
Magistrate. It is also stated in the said affidavit that the informant had
voluntarily given her declaration not to proceed further with the case at hand
nor with the upcoming trial in respect of Sessions (Spl) Case No. 111/2025
currently pending before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge -cum-
Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup (M), Guwahati, as the informant has realized
her bona-fide mistake.
5. The case arose with the Ejahar dated 14.04.2025 lodged by the informant,
wherein she stated that she got married with the petitioner No. 2 in the year
2019 and that she stated that her husband, in-laws, i.e., the other petitioners,
tortured her mentally and further that she got a job as Assistant Professor at
Dimoria College and the husband continued to harass her physically and
Page No.# 4/5
mentally and the relatives used to assault her. She also stated that finding no
alternative, she came to her father's house.
6. In pursuance of the said FIR, the police conducted investigation and
submitted the charge sheet on 31.05.2025, arraying all the petitioners as
accused persons. It is this FIR and the charge Sheet, i.e., challenged by the
petitioners in the instant petition, and as stated above, the petitioners have
entered into an agreement with the informant and that the matter is settled
amongst the parties.
7. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties.
8. It is noticed that the informant has sworn the affidavit on 31.07.2025,
stating that she has started staying peacefully with her husband as well as the
other petitioners and that she stated that it was her bona-fide mistake
inadvertently done in lodging the Ejahar and that she has sworn that she does
not want to continue with the case and that she had spoken about her daughter
that the daughter also misunderstood the real fact. She also stated that she
lodged the Ejahar at the spur of the moment without proper realization.
9. It is already held by the Apex Court that in cases of matrimonial nature or
in cases of civil nature or likewise, which is not very serious, the High Court has
ample power to quash the proceeding by exercising the inherent power and to
quash the FIR or the charge sheet.
10. Considering the affidavits on record and the statement made by the
informant, this Court for the ends of justice finds it fit to quash the FIR dated
Page No.# 5/5
20.04.2025, resulting in registration of All Women P.S. Case No. 0045 dated
20.04.2025 as well as the Charge Sheet No. 38/2025 dated 31.05.2025 and the
subsequent proceedings, pending before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions
Judge -cum- Special Judge (POCSO), Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Sessions (Spl)
Case No. 111/2025.
11. Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
