The High Court can quash non-compoundable charges if the parties amicably resolve their dispute, as the likelihood of conviction is low and the proceeding would be futile.

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.

Heard Mr. T. Gyatso, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, 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 Charge-sheet No. 31/2020 dated 01.07.2020, arising out of GR Case No. 360/2020 in connection with Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 45/2020 dated 18.06.2020 and the subsequent charges framed under Section 354C/448 of the IPC .

3. An FIR was lodged on 18.06.2020, before the Officer-In-Charge, Itanagar Women Police Station by one Smti. Sorang Yapong (the petitioner no. 1), alleging that one Shri Phuntso Dondu (petitioner no. 2), who was serving as a constable at 3rd IRBN had broke into her house situated near Doordarshan Colony, Golo Tinali, Itanagar with the intention to rape her and murder her.

4. On receipt of the FIR, a case was registered against the petitioner no. 2, vide Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 45/2020 dated 18.06.2020, registered under the aforementioned sections.

5. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted the Charge-sheet No. 31/2020 dated 01.07.2020 against the petitioner no. 2, under Sections 354C/448 of the IPC , which is pending trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, Papumpare District. Subsequently, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia has framed charges under Sections 354C/448 of the against the petitioner no. 2.

6. It is the case of the petitioners that the accused person i.e., the petitioner no. 2, on realizing his mistake, sought for an unconditional apology to the petitioner no. 1 and expressed guilt for his actions. Considering such approach and the efforts to resolve the matter amicably, the petitioner no. 1 (the complainant) decided to amicably settle the matter with the petitioner no. 2 and accordingly, the petitioners had executed a Deed of Settlement dated 07.12.2025, whereby, it was decided by the petitioner no. 1 not to pursue the case any further.

7. In the aforesaid Deed of Settlement dated 07.12.2025, the parties i.e., the petitioner no. 1 and 2 had stated that all enmity, grievances and bitter feelings between the parties have been resolved hereafter and both the parties have agreed to abide and to live in mutual peace and co-existence in the near future. It was also agreed by the petitioner no. 1 not to proceed with the Charge-sheet No. 31/2020 dated 01.07.2020 and the charges framed under Sections 354C/448 of the IPC , pending before the learned CJM, Yupia against the petitioner no. 2. It was also agreed by the parties that the parties would be approaching the Hon’ble Gauhati High Court by filing an appropriate petition for quashing and setting aside the criminal proceeding pending before the learned CJM, Yupia, in connection with the Itanagar Women P.S. Case No. 45/2020.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that though the offences under which the accused has been charged are of non-compoundable nature but, taking into account the judicial pronouncements and principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein, non-compoundable offences are also compounded by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in certain 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 declare that they have amicably resolved their dis