Back
2025 Supreme(Gau) 2165
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.
Sunday Sono and Anr. Son of ALte Fei Sono - Appellant
Versus
The Sate of AP represented by the PP of AP - Respondent
Crl.Petn. No. 244 of 2025
Decided On : 12-12-2025
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 482 - High Court's inherent powers - Jurisdiction to quash based on private parties' settlement while considering nature of offence and potential for success of prosecution - Emphasis on balancing justice and preventing abuse of process - Relevant judgments referred to highlight broad principles governing quashing powers. (Paras 8, 9, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, involved in a marital dispute, sought to quash proceedings initiated under Sections 498A/323 IPC against appellant due to allegations of marital discord stemming from an extra-marital affair. A Deed of Settlement was executed to resolve their disputes amicably.
Findings of Court:
Given the nature of allegations as personal rather than public offences, the High Court concluded that continuation of proceedings would be futile and detrimental to the family unit.
Issues: Whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on the mutual settlement of the parties and the impact on family life.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allow for quashing of proceedings in private disputes, especially when resolution has been reached amicably, and when the possibility of conviction is minimal.
Result: Petition allowed; proceedings quashed.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : T Dada
For the Respondent: P P of AP
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis of the case and proceedings. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioners seek quashing of proceedings for marital stability. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court analyzes principles on quashing based on settlements. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. ends of justice served by quashing criminal proceedings. (Para 15) |
| 5. final order disposing of the instant petition. (Para 16 , 17) |
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.
Heard Mr. T. Dada, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional P.P. representing the State.
2. The instant petition has been filed jointly by the petitioners, under Section 528 of the BNSS , 2023, praying for quashing and setting aside of the Seppa Women P.S. Case No. 13/2022, under Section 498A/323 of the IPC , along with the Charge-sheet No. 18/2022 and the connected criminal proceeding in Seppa Women P.S. Case No. 13/2022 (GR Case No. 69/2022), registered under Sections 498A/323 of the , pending before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, East Kameng District.
3. The Seppa Women P.S. Case No. 13/2022, under Sections 498A/323 of the IPC , was registered on the strength of a written complaint, dated 17.08.2022, lodged by the petitioner no. 2, alleging that she was subjected to physical, economic and mental assault by the petitioner no. 1 due to his alleged extra-marital affair with another woman.
4. On receipt of the FIR, a case was registered against the petitioner no. 2, vide G.R. Case No. 69/2022 under the aforementioned sections against the petitioner no. 2.
5. On submission of the Charge-sheet, cognizance of the case was taken by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, and charges under Sections 498A/323 of the IPC , were framed against the petitioner no. 1, vide order dated 29.06.2023, which is pending at the stage of evidence before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa, East Kameng District.
6. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners have filed this joint petition for ensuring the peaceful continuity and stability of their marital relationship. It is contended that the petitioner no. 2 wants to put an end to the criminal proceeding pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa in order to ensure continued stability and non-disruption of their harmonious marital life and for the future of their children. It is contended that any conviction to the petitioner no. 1 would destroy their family and have immense ramifications on their children and marriage. It is contended by the petitioners that looking into the aforementioned reasons, the petitioners have executed a Deed of Settlement dated 22.10.2025 at Seppa, whereby, they have agreed to resolve their disputes amicably. It was also agreed that the petitioner no. 2 would like to settle/compound the dispute in connection with the aforesaid case for the ends of justice and would like not to pursue the aforesaid G.R. Case, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seppa.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the aforesaid Deed of Settlement arrived at by and between the parties as well as the ratios laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in various cases, wherein, the parties have come to an amicable settlement to settle their disputes. The learned counsel further submits that the parties, during the course of the trial and with the passage of time, have amicably resolved all their disputes and misunderstandings and the parties have confirmed and declared that they have amicably resolved their disputes. It is further submitted that they wish to bring the proceeding in the spirit of peace to a closure. It is further submitted that no good purpose would be served in taking the proceeding pending before the learned CJM, Seppa, in connection with the aforesaid case, ahead and the continuation of the same will be a futile exercise and wastage of judicial time. Therefore, the learned counsel prays that the insta
