Quashed

Shibankar Das and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Gauhati HC5 Mar 2026Crl.Pet./1327/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR alleging cheating and forgery in connection with bank loans disbursed through their NGO for village livelihood training. With the case diary unavailable but records showing no criminal activity by the petitioners and informants absent despite notice, the court set aside the FIR and quashed trial processes.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.169/2021 and GR No.3958/2021 set aside; any trial process drawn up by the jurisdictional court quashed.

Shibankar Das and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 10 Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/5

GAHC010266242022

undefined

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

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Pet./1327/2022

¶6

SHIBANKAR DAS AND ANR S/O NIKUNJA BIHARI DAS

¶7

ADDRESS- MAZGAON KHARAATI, TEZPUR SONITPUR, ASSAM, PIN-784001

¶8

2: KAUSTAV MONI DAS S/O NIKUNJA BIHARI DAS MAZGAON KHARAATI TEZPUR ASSAM- 784001

¶9

3: GAUTAM SAIKIA S/O CHANDRA PRASAD SAIKIA

¶10

VILL- DEURI GAON TEZPUR ASSAM--78400

¶11

VERSUS

¶12

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 10 ORS REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶13

2:RUMI DEVI C/O D. NATH VILL- NAPAM P.O. JOHAMARI THELAMARA

¶14

PIN-784149

¶15

3:RUPALI BORO C/O DULAL BORO NO.1 BORPUKHURI

¶16

Page No.# 2/5

¶17

P.O. JAHAMARI THELAMARA PIN-784149 4:PAPI DEVI C/O KESHAB NATH VILL- JOHAMARI PUNIYANI THELAMARA PIN-784149. 5:SANDHYA DEVI C/O DEV NATH

¶18

VILL- JAHAMARI PUNIYANI THELAMARA PIN-784149 6:LALITA BORO C/O NOMAL CH. BORO VILL- BORGAON CHAPARI P.O. BORGAON THELAMARA PIN-784149 7:CHAMPA BORO C/O DILIP BORO VILL- NO. 1 BORPUKHRI P.O. JAHAMARI THELAMARA PIN-784149 8:TUTUMONI DEVI C/O KUMUD NATH VILL- NAPAM P.O. JOHAMARI THELAMARA PIN-784149 9:CHAMPA MUCHAHARI BORO C/O TARUN CH. BORO VILL-NO. 1 BORPUKHURI P.O.JOHAMARI

¶19

Page No.# 3/5

¶20

THELAMARA PIN-784149

¶21

10:JOONMONI DEVI C/O GAJENDRA NATH VILL- NAPAM P.O. JOHAMARI THELAMARA PIN-784149.

¶22

11:SONA BASUMATARY W/O THANESWAR BORO VILL- NO. 1 BORPUKHURI P.O. JAHAMARI THELAMARA PIN-78414

¶23

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S BANIK, MR. D. BORAH

¶24

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶25

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR

¶26

ORDER

¶27

Date : 06.03.2026

¶28

Heard Mr. S. Banik, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent.

¶29

The last order of this Court dated 26.02.2026 has recorded that on failure of the production of the case diary, the matter would be taken up on the basis of the records available.

¶30

Today also, despite the aforesaid observation in the order dated 26.02.2026, the case diary has not been placed before this Court.

¶31

In the Criminal Petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the FIR No.169/2021, which resulted in Thelamara P.S. Case No. 169/2021 under Sections 420/406/468 /34 of the IPC.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of this Court to the order dated 26.04.2022 passed by this Court in AB No.3760/2021 where, this Court after having gone through the case diary had observed that no criminal cases made out against the four petitioners in the said application, three of whom are before this Court in the present criminal petition.

¶33

Page No.# 4/5

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that a loan was sanctioned and the money was credited into the bank account of the NGO of the petitioners to provide training and materials, such as, fish farming, poultry and honey bee keeping etc. for the livelihood in the villages.

¶35

After the informants had availed bank loans from the UCO bank, the bank had released the money to the NGO run by the petitioners, and the informants had purchased goods and materials through the NGO of the petitioners and the businesses were operational. However, due to an act of God, a unprecedented storm, the business of the informant had suffered and they had lodged the FIR claiming that although the money had been disbursed to the NGO, the informants were now required to repay the loan.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the loans have been insured and the liability would not fall upon the informants and moreover, it was in the way of business that the loan amounts paid for by the informants had been disbursed to the NGO run by the petitioners since the expenses in setting up the business have to be borne through the NGO of the petitioners.

¶37

In such circumstance, it is the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners that when the then available case diary did not reveal any criminal activity of the petitioners in having the loans disbursed or in any manner being involved in the repayment of the loan, the informants would remain liable to repay the loss and even in case of their failures, since the loans are already insured, the informants are entitled to avail such insurance to protect their pecuniary loss, if any.

¶38

This Court has gone through the entire records and is of the considered view that neither the FIR nor the case diary, as available in the year 2022, had revealed any criminal activity related to the petitioners herein.

¶39

In such circumstance, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose would be served allowing the trial of the petitioners to proceed with regard to the FIR dated 09.11.2021 lodged by the informant.

¶40

This Court also notes that despite service of notice, the informants have not appeared before this Court to contest the criminal petition.

¶41

In view of the above, the prayers made in the criminal petition are allowed.

¶42

The FIR No. 169/2021, Thelamara P.S. Case No.169/2021 registered under Sections 420/406/468/34 corresponding to GR No.3958/2021 is accordingly interfered with and set aside by this Court.

¶43

Any process drawn up by the jurisdictional Court for trial shall also accordingly stand quashed.

¶44

Page No.# 5/5

¶45

Criminal petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶46

JUDGE

¶47

Comparing Assistant

Shibankar Das and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shibankar Das and Anr. v. the State of Assam and 10 Ors.

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

Imamul Haque Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Fakar Uddin Alias Fakar Uddin Ahmed Vs the State of Assam

Rakibul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Amina Khatun Vs the State of Assam

Swahidul Islam Vs the State of Assam

Dipen Orang @ Dipen Owrang Vs the State of Assam