Sape Tala and 2 Ors. Vs The State of Ap

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC040006802025

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : Crl.Petn./92/2025

¶5

Sape Tala and 2 Ors

¶6

Son of Late Sape Tasing, a permanent resident of Village Sape, PO and PS Koloriang, Kurung Kumey District, Arunachal Pradesh. 2: Smti Riya Yadam Age: Occupation : Daughter of Riya Taru a permanent resident of Village Sarli PO and PS Koloriang Kurung Kumey District Arunachal Pradesh.

¶7

3: Smti Riya Yayu Age: Occupation : Wife of Riya Taru a permanent resident of Village Sarli PO and PS Koloriang Kurung Kumey District Arunachal Pradesh

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

The State of AP represented by the PP of AP

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : Paniye Bate, Likha Kagung

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP,

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

Page No.# 2/4

¶14

THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY ORDER

¶15

06.05.2025

¶16

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

¶17

This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, filed by the petitioners praying for setting aside and quashing the criminal proceedings of G.R. Case No.20/2024, arising out of Koloriang P.S. Case No.09/2024, under Sections 452/325/506/427 IPC, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Koloriang.

¶18

The case in brief, is that on 11.06.2024, an FIR was received from one Smti Riya Yadam (petitioner No.2 herein) before the Officer-in-Charge, Police Station, Koloriang, alleging that she and the petitioner No.1(ex-husband of the petitioner No.2) has been living separately since last 1(one) year, but on 11.06.2024 at around 0300 hours, the petitioner No.1 forcibly entered into the residence of the petitioner No.2, located at Lur Bogu, Sarli Circle and assaulted her and her mother (the petitioner No.3 herein) with wooden sticks, causing head injuries, which led to filing of an FIR.

¶19

This present petition is jointly filed by the accused (the petitioner No.1); complainant(the petitioner No.2) and petitioner No.3( mother of the petitioner No.2), on the ground that they have amicably settled the matter. It is also on record that the petitioners

¶20

Page No.# 3/4

¶21

have amicably settled vide Deed of Settlement dated 22.10.2024 (Annexure F to the petition) and it is disclosed that out of misunderstanding, the petitioner No. 2 lodged the FIR against the petitioner No. 1. Accordingly, it is contended that the petitioners have amicably settled the matter amongst themselves and therefore, this Court in exercise of power under Section 528 of BNSS should quash the criminal prosecution inasmuch as the offences charged are not compoundable under the provision of BNSS.

¶22

The power under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 is an inherent power and such inherent power can be exercised to quash a criminal proceeding or a criminal complaint but while doing so the court is to follow certain principles. Such power can be exercised, amongst others, when the offences alleged are overwhelmingly and predominantly civil in character or when such dispute arises out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and the parties have resolved the entire disputes amongst themselves. While exercising such directory power it is to be seen that such offences if compromised shall not affect the society at large.

¶23

In the FIR the primary allegation is petitioner No. 1 forcibly entered into the residence of the petitioner No. 2 and assaulted her. Though there are allegation of assault, however, perusal of the material available on the record, it is seen that the nature of allegation cannot be said to be heinous and very serious. From the complaint, it is also seen that both the petitioners have also resolved their disputes. In the aforesaid backdrop, the dispute, in the opinion of this court, is relatable to internal family dispute and that

¶24

Page No.# 4/4

¶25

quashment of the same shall not have any impact on the society at large.

¶26

Therefore, in the considered opinion of this court, as the parties have amicably resolved the disputes and that the offences arises out of matrimonial relation and also that if the offences are allowed to be compounded that will have no serious impact on the society, the power under Section 528 of BNSS can be exercised in the given facts of the present case.

¶27

Accordingly, this petition is allowed by setting aside and quashing the criminal proceeding being criminal proceedings of G.R. Case No.20/2024, arising out of Koloriang P.S. Case No.09/2024, under Sections 452/325/506/427 IPC, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Koloriang.

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Comparing Assistant

Sape Tala and 2 Ors. v. The State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sape Tala 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Miss Leena Tallang Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Takot Taggu Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Tajen Yorpen and Anr. Vs The State of Ap

Tame Tarang Vs The State of Ap

Tarh Tayang Vs The State of Ap and Anr.

Nyasam Jongsam Vs Tesam Pongte and 2 Ors.