[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Gauhati High Court
Page No.# 1/4 vs The State Of Assam on 10 February, 2026
Author: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Bench: Parthivjyoti Saikia
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010013012026
2026:GAU-AS:1771
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./96/2026
DR JABIN AHMED AND ANR
W/O SAYED RAFIUL ISLAM D/O LATE JALALUDDIN AHMED RESIDENT
OFHOUSE NO. 52, BYELANE NO. 11, APJ ABDUL KALAM PATH, F. ALI
AHMED ROAD, PANJABARI, SIX MILE, GUWAHATI 781022
2: DR SAYED RAFIUL ISLAM
SON OF DR. SYED NURUL ISLAM RESIDENT OF - HOUSE NO. 953
BYELANE NO. 9
GOKUL PATH
DR. ZAKIR HUSSAIN ROAD
SARUMOTORIA
GUWAHATI 78103
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z ALAM, MS. S NAZNEEN,MR. M AHMED
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/4
:: BEFORE ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
O R D E R
10.02.2026
Heard Ms. S. Nazneen, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also
heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. This is a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for
quashing the proceedings of PRC Case No.892/2024 pending in the court of the
learned Special Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), at Guwahati.
3. The petitioners are wife and husband. Both of them are medical graduates. The
wife lodged an FIR before police on 15 th September, 2023. In that FIR, she alleged
that her husband, more particularly, his mother and sister had mentally harassed her
after her marriage. She was in fact misbehaved in her matrimonial house. Not only
that, her husband had demanded an amount of ₹100,000/- from her for purchasing a
car. The wife has alleged that the family members of her husband also demanded
different things from her. The list of allegations is very long.
4. Now, both the husband and wife have settled their disputes and come together
to this Court praying for quashing 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
Page No.# 3/4
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
vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal
grudge."
7. Reverting to the case in hand, this Court is of the opinion that when the husband
and wife have settled their disputes and chooses to live peacefully, in such a
circumstance, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue before the trial court,
would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court. This is a fit case for
exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023.
8. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed. The proceedings of PRC Case
Page No.# 4/4
No.892/2024 pending in the court of the Special Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Kamrup (M), at Guwahati, is quashed and set aside.
With the above direction, the present criminal petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
