Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Jamaluddin Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of Assam — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2023)

Home
Gauhati HC
2023
Jamaluddin Ahmed and Anr. Vs the State of AssamJamaluddin Ahmed and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Allowed

Jamaluddin Ahmed and Anr. v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC19 Jul 2023Crl.Pet./535/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court today

What did the court decide?

charge sheet being C.S. No.265/2017 is set aside and quashed

What the court decided

AI extract

A

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010120172023

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

Case No. : Crl.Pet./535/2023

JAMALUDDIN AHMED AND ANR S/O NUR HUSSAIN R/O VILL- DHALPUR P.O. DHALPUR, P.S. SIPAJHAR DIST. DARRANG, ASSAM, PIN-784145

2: MONUWARA KHATUN W/O JAMALUDDIN AHMED R/O VILL- DHALPUR P.O. DHALPUR P.S. SIPAJHAR DIST. DARRANG ASSAM PIN-78414

VERSUS

THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M K HUSSAIN

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

Page No.# 2/5

:: BEFORE ::

Issues for consideration

2 issues framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC should be quashed in light of a compromise between the parties.
2.
Whether allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of the court.

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.Explained¶21
(2008) 9 SCC 677 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana v. Bhajan LalExplained¶24

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Jamaluddin Ahmed and another
petitioner
Monuwara Khatun
respondent
The State of Assam

Coram

AI extract

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Gauhati HC
Decided on: 19 Jul 2023 · July
Registered: 3 Jun 2023
Case no.: Crl.Pet./535/2023

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Parthivjyoti Saikia

Jia Uddin Vs the State of Assam
18 Jul 2023
Pranjal Phukan Vs Parashar Nath
18 Jul 2023
Abdus Sattar @ Abdul Sattar Vs the State of Assam
18 Jul 2023
Golam Rabbani Alhaj Vs the State of Assam
19 Jul 2023

Cite this judgement

Jamaluddin Ahmed and Anr. v. the State of Assam, Crl.Pet./535/2023 (GAU), decided on 19 July 2023.

The Gauhati High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited2

Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr.Explained¶21
State of Haryana v. Bhajan LalExplained¶24

Open Authorities

Outcome

charge sheet being C.S. No.265/2017 is set aside and quashed

Issue for consideration

Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC should be quashed in light of a compromise between the parties. +1 more

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court quashed charge sheet under Section 482 CrPC where husband and wife compromised dispute. Quashed proceedings where no prima facie case due to settlement.

A compact analysis

This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

O R D E R

19.07.2023

Heard Mr. M.K. Hussain, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam representing State respondent.

2. This is a joint application under Section 482 of the CrPC praying for quashing the charge sheet being C.S. No.265/2017 relating to G.R. Case No.3150/2017 arising out of Sipajhar P.S. Case No.751/2017 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Darrang, Mangaldai.

3. The wife Monuwara Khatun lodged a complaint against her husband Jamaluddin Ahmed and his family members alleging offences under Sections 323/447/448/420/307/354/406 of the Indian Penal Code r/w Section 34 of the said Code. Finally, the complaint was charge sheeted by police as referred to above.

4. Now, both husband and wife have joined together to file the present petition under Section 482 of the CrPC stating that they have compromised their dispute and have been living peacefully together.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.

6. The Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. , reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677 , held that when a

Page No.# 3/5

compromise has been arrived at between the parties, by which the parties have withdrawn all claims and allegations against each other, technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in quashing the criminal proceedings since the same would be a futile exercise.

7. The power under Section 482 of the CrPC is the inherent power of the High Court for preventing the abuse of the process of the Court. The guidelines for exercising power under Section 482 of the CrPC are laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal , AIR 1992 SC 604. The relevant paragraph is quoted 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

Page No.# 4/5

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.”

8. I find that under the given circumstances of the case, there is no possibility of future conviction in this case and allowing the criminal proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the court. This is a fit case for exercising the power under Section 482 of the CrPC The criminal petition is allowed.

9. Accordingly, the charge sheet being C.S. No.265/2017 relating to G.R. Case No.3150/2017 arising out of Sipajhar P.S. Case No.751/2017

Page No.# 5/5

pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Darrang, Mangaldai, is set aside and quashed.

The criminal petition is disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant

AIR 1992 SC 604 · Who else cites this

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

CrPC482

Parthivjyoti Saikia

CNR

GAHC010120172023

Topic

Quashing and FIR

Bench

Parthivjyoti Saikia

Disposal

Disposed Of

Riajul Islam @ Riaz Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

19 Jul 2023

Deepraj Roy and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

19 Jul 2023

Statutes1

CrPC482

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

Parthivjyoti Saikia

Parties & counsel