[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam on 4 February, 2026
Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010015812026
2026:GAU-AS:1390
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./112/2026
SMTI. RUBI BAISHYA AND 2 ORS.
WIFE OF SRI HIMANGSHU KUMAR DAS, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO.
349,SANKAR NAGAR, BYE-LANE-1, P.O. HENGRABARI,P.S. DISPUR,
BORBARI, GUWAHATI, DISTRICT-KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, PIN 781036
2: SRI HIMANGSHU KUMAR DAS
SON OF SRI A KHIL KUMAR DAS
R/OP HOUSE NO. .10
NAMGHAR PATH
SUNDARBORI
JALUKBARI
GUWAHATI
DIST.KAMRUP (METRO)
ASSAM
3: SMTI. NIRUPAMA DAS
W/O SRI AKHIL KUMAR DAS
RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 10
NAMGHAR PATH
SUNDARBORI
JALUKBARI
GUWAHATI
DIST. KAMRUP (METRO)
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY THE PP, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. S BHUYAN,
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
:: BEFORE ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
O R D E R
04.02.2026
Heard Ms. S. Bhuyan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also
heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. This is a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for
quashing the proceedings relating to All Women P.S. Panbazar, Guwahati Case
No.84/2025.
3. In her FIR dated 17.11.2025, the petitioner Rubi Baishya, the wife of the
petitioner Himangsu Kumar Das has alleged that her husband and her mother-in-law
the petitioner Nirupama Das had frequently harassed her mentally to put pressure
upon her to leave her job. Her husband and her mother-in-law wanted her to be a
housewife doing domestic work only. It may be stated that the sister of her husband
also works outside her house. But even then, her husband did not want her to do any
job outside the house.
4. Rubi Baishya has alleged that her husband wanted to perform unnatural sex with
her and when she refused, she was physically harassed and he had forcible unnatural
sex with her.
5. The list of allegations is endless. She was even termed as a prostitute.
6. Today, Rubi Baishya, her husband and her mother-in-law has to come to this
Court and prayed for quashing the FIR lodged by her stating that her dispute with her
Page No.# 3/4
husband and mother-in-law is a private matrimonial dispute and with the intervention
of elder family members, they have settled their dispute.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.
8. 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."
9. 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.
Moreover, the dispute is between husband and wife. They have settled their dispute
and they are now living peacefully. So, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue
before the trial court would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court.
10. 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.
11. The criminal proceedings relating to All Women P.S. Panbazar, Guwahati Case
No.84/2025, is quashed and set aside.
The criminal petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
