Nimai Santhal and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Ap

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC040001712025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Petn./14/2025

¶5

Nimai Santhal and 2 Ors

¶6

Son of Late Choitu Santhal, presently residing at Lekhi village, PO and PS Nirjuli, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh, Nirjuli 791109 2: Neelam Kirat Age: Occupation : Son of Late Neelam Tapa resident of quarter No.13/T-II opposite Civil Secretariat Itanagar PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Pradesh. 3: Longku Sanjeev Age: Occupation : Son of Late Longku Tania permanent resident of Village Sordik PO and PS Raga Kamle District Arunachal Pradesh and presently residing at Nerba Colony near Tourism Office PO and PS Itanagar Papum Pare District Arunachal Prades VERSUS

¶7

The State of AP represented by the PP of AP

¶8

Advocate for the Petitioner : T T Tara, Pondit Ronya,Kirmani Lollen,Khoda Apa,Terji Kamchi,Taba Tokur,Gamken Bam

¶9

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,

¶10

Page No.# 2/5

¶11

:: BEFORE ::

¶12

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

19.03.2025

¶15

Heard Mr. T.T. Tara, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T. Ete, the Addl. Public Prosecutor, State of Arunachal Pradesh.

¶16

2. This is a joint application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing and setting aside the proceedings of Sessions Case No.34/2023 arising out of Nirjuli P.S. Case/FIR No.20/2022 pending before the District & Sessions Court, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh.

¶17

3. On 22^nd February, 2022 at about 6 P.M., two unknown boys, not known to the informant, came to the mutton selling shop of the informant in a Bolero vehicle bearing Registration No.AR-01E-9100. Those two unknown boys assaulted the husband of the informant. He also defended himself by attacking those boys with a knife. But, he fell unconscious. Those two boys picked up the husband of the informant in their vehicle and sped away. Those two boys allegedly threw the husband of the informant to a drain near the Railway Station.

¶18

4. Police registered a case and started investigation. Those two boys were identified as petitioners Shri Neelam Kirat and Shri Langku Sanjeev.

¶19

5. On conclusion of investigation, police filed the charge sheet under Section 367, 325 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of the said Code.

¶20

Page No.# 3/5

¶21

6. Today, the victim Nimai Santhal along with the other two petitioners jointly filed this application stating that they have compromised the matter, which took place because of misunderstanding of facts. They have admitted that during the scuffle, the petitioner Nimai Santhal sustained a cut injury on his chest by his own knife.

¶22

7. All the petitioners have admitted that Nimai Santhal was not thrown into a drain near the Railway Station, rather he was dropped there from the Bolero vehicle.

¶23

8. On 25.06.2023, all the petitioners sat together and resolved to solve their disputes and ultimately, they have entered into an agreement on 20.11.2024, which was sworn before a Notary Public at Naharlagun.

¶24

9. Mr. Tara has submitted that all the petitioners are now living peacefully and in such a circumstance, allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court, will cause growth of enmity between them. According to Mr. Tara, the petitioner Nimai Santhal was in an intoxicated condition at the time of the offence and he had suddenly entered into an argument with the other two petitioners.

¶25

10. I have given my anxious considerations to the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.

¶26

11. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, which is a pari materia of 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:

¶27

“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.

¶28

Page No.# 4/5

¶29

(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.

¶30

(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.

¶31

(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.

¶32

(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.

¶33

(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.

¶34

(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.

¶35

(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.”

¶36

12. This Court is of the opinion that under the given circumstances and since the injured person himself pleaded for quashing and setting aside the proceedings of Sessions Case No.34/2023 arising out of Nirjuli P.S. Case/FIR No.20/2022 pending before the District & Sessions Court, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh, allowing such a criminal proceeding to continue before the trial court, would be noting but an abuse of the process of the court. There is no possibility of future conviction in this case.

¶37

13. This is a fit case for exercising power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023. Therefore, the criminal petition is allowed.

¶38

14. Accordingly, the proceedings of Sessions Case No.34/2023 arising out of Nirjuli P.S. Case/FIR No.20/2022 pending before the District & Sessions Court, Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh, is quashed and set aside.

¶39

Page No.# 5/5

¶40

The Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶41

JUDGE

¶42

Comparing Assistant

Nimai Santhal and 2 Ors. v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nimai Santhal and 2 Ors. v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakom Dugi and 13 Ors. Vs The State of Ap

Kipa Kasung and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Rido Tarak Vs The State of Ap

Kabuk Perme Vs the State of Ap and Anr.

Agaim Langhi Vs The State of Ap

Smti Teli Ama and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Ap