[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/5 vs The State Of Assam on 17 February, 2026
Page No.# 1/5
GAHC010027232026
2026:GAU-AS:2270
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./218/2026
TASMINA KHATUN AND ANR
D/O TAIZUDDIN SHEIKH
WIFE OF JEL HUSSAIN, RESIDENT OF VILL- CHALANTAPARA PART-III,P.S.
JOGIGHOPA,DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILL- KHAJATTARI, P.S. KALGACHIA, DIST.
BARPETA, ASSAM
2: JEL HUSSAIN
SON OF LATE ABDUL MAJID
R/O VILL-KHAJATTARI
P.S. KALGACHIA
DIST. BARPETA
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, M RAHMAN,MR N AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA
ORDER
Date : 17.02.2026.
Page No.# 2/5
Heard Mr. N. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. K.K.
Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State
respondent.
This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing
of the Charge Sheet No.123/2024, dated 30.09.2024 as well as the criminal
proceeding of the PRC No.30/2025, under Section 376/506 of the IPC, which is
pending before the learned SDJM (M), North Salmara, Bongaigaon.
It is submitted by Mr. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioners that the
present petition for quashing is jointly filed by the victim and the accused as the
petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 respectively. The learned counsel for the
petitioners further submitted that due to some misunderstanding, the case was
lodged by the petitioner No.1. But at present, out of their love and affair, they
got married and staying together as husband and wife peacefully. To that effect,
they have also entered into a compromise which has also been annexed with
the present petition. The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted
that as the case has already been compromised and both the petitioners are
living together as husband and wife, the probability of conviction in the present
case is very bleak, as the informant/ victim herself entered into a compromise
and got married with the accused/petitioner No.2. Even, if the case proceeded,
there is no chance of adducing any evidence against the accused/ petitioner
No.1 and accordingly, it is submitted that it is a fit case for quashing by invoking
the provision under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023.
Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State
respondent submitted in this regard that the case was registered under Sections
Page No.# 3/5
376/506 of the IPC, which is not a compoundable case. However, he submitted
that considering the compromise between the parties and the case being private
in nature, there may be quashing of the case and accordingly, the State raises
no objection, if the case has already been settled/compromised between the
parties.
After hearing the submission made by learned counsel for both sides, I have
also perused the case record and it is seen that there was a serious allegation
brought against the petitioner No.2 but subsequently the matter has been
compromised between the parties and at present from the compromise deed, it
is seen that both the victim/informant as well as the accused persons are living
together as husband and wife and to that effect, they have also sworn an
affidavit.
In the case of Kapil Gupta Vs. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr., reported in 2022 0
Supreme (SC) 1108, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that "it is
further to be noted that since the respondent No. 2 herself is not supporting the
prosecution case, even if the criminal trial is permitted to go ahead, it will end in
nothing else than an acquittal, if the request of the parties is denied, it will be
amounting to only adding one more criminal case to the already overburdened
criminal courts."
In the instant case, it is also seen that the case has already been compromised
between the parties and there is no chance of adducing any evidence against
the present accused/ petitioner No.2, as the victim herself appeared before this
Court as petitioner No.1 for quashing of the criminal proceeding. Further, it is
seen that the case is at the stage of appearance and thus, they have come
Page No.# 4/5
before this Court immediately after filing of the charge sheet to compromise the
case and accordingly, this petition has been filed jointly by both the petitioners.
In the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. , reported in
(2014) 6 SCC 466, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had expressed the view that while
exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the timing of settlement is very
crucial and in cases where the settlement is arrived immediately after the
alleged commission of offence or the matter is still under investigation, the High
Court may be liberal in accepting the statement to quash the criminal
proceeding/investigation. In cases where the charge is framed, but the evidence
is yet to be commenced and evidence is still in initial stage, the High Court can
show benevolence in exercising its power favourably, but after prima facie
assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above.
Considering the submission made by learned counsel for both sides, the stage
of the case vis-à-vis the compromise between the parties, it is seen that even if
the case is allowed to proceed, the chance of conviction is very remote and
bleak and it is very unlikely that the informant/victim will depose against the
accused person, as the matter has already been compromised between them.
In view of the entire facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the
decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court and also for the ends of justice, this Court is
of the opinion that it is a fit case to invoke the power under Section 528 of the
BNSS, 2023 for setting aside and quashing the Charge Sheet No.123/2024,
dated 30.09.2024 as well as the criminal proceeding of the PRC No.30/2025,
under Section 376/506 of the IPC, which is pending before the learned SDJM
(M), North Salmara, Bongaigaon.
Page No.# 5/5
Accordingly, the present petition stands allowed and disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
