JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Saikia, learned Advocate General, Assam and Mr. M. Phukan, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State/respondent No.1. Also heard Mr. P. Bora, learned Sr. Counsel for the respondent No. 2/informant victim.

2. By this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed as follows-

i) Set aside/quash Dispur P.S. Case No. 692/2023 under Sections 509/294/341/352/354/354A (iv)/506 of the IPC read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (for short ‘I.T. Act’);

ii) Set aside/quash the Notice, dated 23.04.2023 issued by Dispur P.S.;

iii) Direct the respondents not to take any coercive action against the petitioner during pendency of the present petition;

iv) Stay the proceedings under notice of personal appearance/summons, dated 21.04.2023 issued by the Inspector General of Police, CID, Ulubari, Guwahati, Assam during the pendency of the present petition and further,

3. In the interim, the petitioner has prayed for stay of the operation of the impugned FIR in Dispur P.S. Case No. 692/2023 as well as to direct the respondent State not to take any coercive steps/action against him.

4. The contentions made in the First Information Report (FIR), in short, are that the informant/victim, is the former President of the Assam Youth Congress and the present petitioner is the President of Indian Youth Congress. It has been alleged that the petitioner has been persistently harassing the informant/victim woman mentally by way of sexist and slang words and also threatening her with dire consequences if she complained the same before the high office bearers of the Youth Congress. It is further alleged that when the alleged victim went to Raipur in the state of Chhattisgarh to attend the plenary session of the Congress Party held on 25.02.2023, she was received by one Bhupen Bora, the President of the Assam Pradesh Congress Committee (APCC) at Mayfair Hotel and met other high office bearers of the Congress party. At the entrance of the hotel when she came across the petitioner, he heckled her by holding her arms and also threatened her by using slang words. It is also alleged that despite complaining about the persistent unwarranted conduct of the petitioner on several occasions to the high office bearers of the Congress Party, her complaint did not yield any result and as such, she lodged the instant FIR.

5. On 26.04.2023, this Court passed the following order (relevant portions)-

“5. Issue notice to the respondent No.2. Steps be taken by registered speed post with A/D within 2(two) days.

6. As the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1/State has accepted notice, no fresh notice needs to be issued. However, a copy of the petition along with the documents annexed thereto, be furnished to Mr. Saikia and Mr. Phukan jointly during the course of the day.

7. Call for a legible scanned copy of the case diary along with 164 statement of the victim/complainant.

8. Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel appearing for the petitioner, has persistently insisted on grant of interim relief to the petitioner today itself on merit of the case as well as on the ground that the complainant has filed the case for political vendetta. In support of his submission and in the backdrop of nature of facts and circumstances, Mr. Choudhury has relied on the following grounds-

(a) That Assam Police has no jurisdiction to inquire into any of the allegations made in the complaint let alone registration of the instant FIR. In this context, Mr. Choudhury has relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in (i) Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma, reported in (2021) 12 SCC 674 and (ii) Bimla Rawal and Ors. Vs. NCT of Delhi, reported in 2008(1) LRC 391 (Delhi);

(b) That the ingredients of the offences as alleged are not made out on a prima facie reading of the complaint. In this regard, Mr. Choudhury has referred to the jud