Allowed

Bhupen Gogoi and 12 Ors. v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC5 Jun 2020Crl.Pet./800/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed a criminal petition seeking quashing of a charge-sheet. The petitioners, accused in a GR case involving IPC offences, argued they were similarly situated to a prior petitioner for whom the charge-sheet was quashed after the matter was amicably settled. The court noted that while some IPC sections cited were non-compoundable, inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC can

What did the court decide?

Charge-sheet submitted against each of the petitioners in connection with G.R. Case No. 146/2009 stands quashed. Criminal petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Bhupen Gogoi and 12 Ors. Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2020)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010159512019

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 800/2019

¶5

1:BHUPEN GOGOI AND 12 ORS. S/O- BHADESWAR GOGOI, R/O- VILL.- TENGANI HAMUKJAN, DIST.GOLAGHAT, ASSAM.

¶6

2: SRI NITUL BORA S/O- KULEDHRA BORA R/O- VILL. AND P.O. GERUKANI GAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶7

3: SRI CHENIRAM GOGOI S/O- LATE KUKHESWAR GOGOI R/O- VILL.- TENGANI HAMUKJAN DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶8

4: SRI RAM ROBIDAS S/O- RAGHUBOR ROBIDAS R/O- VILL.- 16 NO. DIGHALIGAON P.O. BILLGAON P.S. BORPATHAR DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶9

5: SRI RANJIT RAJKHOWA S/O- LATE KHAGESWAR RAJKHOWA R/O- VILL.- KHAKANGURI DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶10

Page No.# 2/5

¶11

6: SRI GAJEN GOGOI S/O- LATE KUKHESWAR GOGOI R/O- VILL.- TENGANI HAMUKJAN DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶12

7: SRI DILIP GOGOI S/O- BHADRESWAR GOGOI R/O- VILL.- HAMUKJAN GAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶13

8: SRI MINTU GOGOI S/O- JIBON GOGOI R/O- VILL.- HAMUKJAN GAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶14

9: SRI BUPAI SAIKIA S/O- LATE NALI SAIKIA R/O- VILL.- BORHULA GAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶15

10: SRI PRABIN TAMULI S/O- LATE P. TAMULI R/O- VILL. AND P.O. KHAKANGURI DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶16

11: SRI JIBAN GOGOI S/O- HOLIRAM GOGOI R/O- VILL.- HAMUKJAN GAON DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶17

12: SRI REBA KANTA DUTTA @ PETOU S/O- LATE BIREN DUTTA R/O- VILL.- KHAKANGURI DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM.

¶18

Page No.# 3/5

¶19

13: SRI LOHIT BORA S/O- HOLIRAM BORA VILL.- TENGANI HAMUKJAN DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM

¶20

VERSUS 1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY P.P., ASSAM

¶21

2:SRI ASHIM HANDIQUE S/O- UPEN HANDIQUE R/O- SAMUKJAN P.O. BORPATHAR DIST.- GOLAGHAT ASSAM

¶22

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BORTHAKUR

¶23

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶24

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Date : 05-06-2020

¶27

Heard Ms. P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Choudhury,

¶28

learned Addl. P.P. Assam appearing for the State and Mr. P.K. Borah, learned counsel representing the informant/ respondent No. 2.

¶29

The petitioners herein are all accused persons in G.R. Case No. 146/2009 arising out of Borpathar P.S. Case No. 54/2009 registered under Section 147/ 148/ 149/ 436/ 427/ 323/ 365/ 379 of the IPC. Upon completion of the investigation charge-sheet was also

¶30

Page No.# 4/5

¶31

submitted by the police in the aforesaid case. However, subsequently the matter was amicably settled by and between the parties pursuant whereto, the informant had also agreed not to pursue the matter any further.

¶32

In view of the above developments, one of the co-accused, viz. Akhil Gogoi, had earlier approached this Court by filing Crl. Petition No. 444/2019 seeking an order for quashing of the criminal proceeding in exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled by and between the parties.

¶33

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl. P.P. Assam and the learned counsel appearing for the informant, this Court had passed order dated 21-062019 quashing the charge-sheet submitted against the petitioner in connection with the petitioner in G.R. Case No. 146/2009.

¶34

Ms. Bora submits that the present petitioners are similarly situated as the petitioner in Crl. Petition No. 444/2019 and have, therefore, approached this Court by filing this petition seeking the benefit of a similar order.

¶35

Mr. Choudhury, Learned Addl. P.P. Assam submits that Section 436 and 365 are not offences which are compoundable under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C.

¶36

Mr. P.K. Borah, learned counsel for the informant submits that he would have no objection if the prayer made by the petitioners is allowed by this Court.

¶37

In the order dated 21-06-2019, this Court has categorically observed that although Sections 436 and 365 IPC are not offences which are compoundable under Section 320

¶38

Page No.# 5/5

¶39

Cr.P.C. yet, law is well settled that Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not impose any limitation in the exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if the facts and circumstances of the case so justifies. This Court had further observed that since the matter has already been compromised between the parties, permitting the criminal case to proceed further would amount to abuse of the process of law. On the basis of such observation and taking note of the facts and circumstances of the case, the charge sheet submitted against the petitioner in the Crl. Petition No. 444/2019 was quashed by this Court. After going through the materials on record and upon hearing the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any justifiable ground for adopting a different approach in case of the present petitioners.

¶40

In view of the above, this criminal petition succeeds and is hereby allowed.

¶41

The charge-sheet submitted against each of the petitioners in connection with G.R. Case No. 146/2009 stands quashed.

¶42

Criminal petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶43

JUDGE GS

¶44

Comparing Assistant

Bhupen Gogoi and 12 Ors. v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupen Gogoi and 12 Ors. 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

Uddhab Das @ Uddab Das Vs M/S May Fair Developers and Builders and Anr.

Pradip Kr. Barman Vs Rupali Dutta

Debendra Suklabaidya Vs Panubala Suklabaidya and 2 Ors.

Krishna Gopal Karmakar Vs Janardhan Saha and 7 Ors.

M/S. Asian Bulls Construction and Developers Ltd. Vs Nijara Dewriary @ Archana Brahma Dewriary and 7 Ors.

Mahima Das and Ors. Vs M/S Madhu Food Products and Anr.