Quashed

Hanifuddin Ahmed v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC9 Dec 2019Crl.Pet./422/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On writ petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Gauhati High Court quashed the FIR under Sections 498A and 494 IPC. The Court found that the petitioner and respondent had dissolved their marriage via talaq and the matter was amicably settled, making further investigation an abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

The FIR in connection with Mangaldoi PS Case No. 181/2019 under Sections 498A/494 of the IPC and the entire case were set aside and quashed.

Hanifuddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Domestic Violence | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC010083232019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 422/2019

¶5

1:HANIFUDDIN AHMED

¶6

S/O LATE SADULLAH, R/O VILL-MULLAPARA, P.S.-MANGALDAI, DISTDARRANG, ASSAM

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM

¶9

2:NASIMA BEGUM W/O MD HANIFUDDIN AHMED D/O LT. MUBARAK ALI R/O VILL-MUSLIM GHOPA P.S.-SIPAJHAR DIST-DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78414

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A M BORA

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT BORTHAKUR

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Date : 09-12-2019

¶15

Heard Ms. C Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. BJ Dutta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State respondent No.1. Also heard Ms. S Parbin, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2.

¶16

Page No.# 2/3

¶17

By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has prayed for setting aside and quashing the First Information Report (‘FIR’ for short) in connection with Mangaldoi PS Case No.181/2019 under Sections 498 A/494 of the IPC.

¶18

Ms. C Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner is the husband of the respondent No.2/informant. Ms. Choudhury further contends that due to domestic differences, they have separated by effecting talaq. According to Ms. Choudhury their marriage was solemnized in the year 2002 and out of their wedlock a male child was born who is presently aged about 13 years. The respondent No.2 filed the above case after about 16 years of marriage and she had previously filed a complaint case being CR Case No.806/2016 under Section 406 of the IPC in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darrang, which was dismissed for her inability to produce any evidence and thereafter, again filed the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner to harass him, despite it suffers from legal infirmity for want of compliance of Sections 154 and 156 Cr.P.C.

¶19

Ms. S Parbin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2/ informant, drawing attention to the two affidavits filed by the respondent No.2, submits no objection if the FIR lodged by her is set aside and quashed. Ms. Parbin submits that the FIR was filed due to some misunderstandings between her and the petitioner and the matter is by now amicably settled between them and further, that their marriage is dissolved by affecting talaq vide the Talaqnama, dated 04.05.2019.

¶20

Mr. BJ Dutta, learned Addl.P.P. for the State/ respondent No.1 contends that as the dispute was related to the domestic differences between the petitioner and the respondent No.2/ informant and they have dissolved their marriage and further, the respondent No.2 attributed the FIR as the consequence of mis-understanding only, there cannot be any objection to quashing of the same as prayed, in the interest of justice.

¶21

A perusal of the two affidavits filed by the respondent No. 2/informant along with the averments made by the petitioner in the petition reveals that both of them have dissolved their marital contract by effecting talaq and also the matter is amicably compromised. Ex-

¶22

Page No.# 3/3

¶23

facie settlement appears to be genuine. As such, in view of the conduct of the respondent No.2 agreeing to the settlement and no objection to the petition filed by the petitioner continuance of investigation/criminal proceeding into the case would be an abuse of the process of law. Therefore, this Court finds it expedient to quash the FIR, whereupon Mangaldoi PS Case No. 181/2019 is registered.

¶24

Resultantly, the FIR, in connection with Mangaldoi PS Case No. 181/2019 under Sections 498 A/494 of the IPC and the aforesaid entire case are hereby set aside and quashed as prayed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶25

The petition stands disposed of.

¶26

Comparing Assistant

Hanifuddin Ahmed v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanifuddin Ahmed v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abu Bakkar Siddique Sk. @ Md. Abu Bakkar Siddique and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and 3 Ors.

Sabir Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Sri Pradip Dutta and 6 Ors. Vs Sri Tapan Kumar Das and 2 Ors.

Musleh Uddin Laskar and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Hema Prava Medhi Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Moina Gohain @ Dibyajyoti Vs the State of Assam and Anr.