Back
2026 Supreme(Gau) 218
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
PRANJAL DAS, J.
Abhishek Kar, S/o Anand Kar - Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam, Rep By The Pp, Assam - Respondent
Principal Seat, Criminal Petition No.986 of 2025
Decided On : 09-02-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Proceedings
Act Referred
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT : S.67
Assam Witch Hunting Prohibition, Prevention and Protection Act : S.4
BHARATIYA NYAYA SANHITA : S.196, S.197, S.528
Headnote
(B) Criminal proceedings - Merits of charge-sheet - Court found the allegations did not constitute any offence, thus quashing the proceedings. (Paras 28-30)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner allegedly made derogatory comments about Assamese women through a YouTube channel, leading to a police case invoking multiple sections.
Findings of Court:
The court determined the petitioner’s statements did not fulfill the required legal criteria for the alleged offences.
Issues: Whether the statements of the petitioner amounted to promoting enmity and whether the criminal proceedings were justified.
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the alleged statements did not meet the thresholds for criminal activity under the cited sections, emphasizing the need for mens rea to establish an offence.
Result: The petition was allowed, and all criminal proceedings against the petitioner were quashed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. registration of case based on alleged statement (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding malicious prosecution (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 3. criteria for criminal liability under relevant provisions (Para 8 , 19 , 21) |
| 4. lack of sufficient ground for prosecution (Para 20 , 22 , 28 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
Pranjal Das, J.
1. Heard Mr. H. R. A. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel as well as Mr. K. Baishya, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.
2. The instant criminal petition has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Abhishek Kar, invoking the powers under Section 528 B.N.S.S. seeking quashing of CID Cyber P.S. Case No. 01 of 2025 under Section 196(1), 197(1), 353(2) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (herein after B.N.S.S), read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, read with Section 4 of the Assam Witch Hunting (Prohibition, Prevention and Protection) Act, 2015. The aforesaid police case was registered based on an FIR dated 11.01.2025 lodged by Inspector Rakesh Kalita at the Cyber Police Station, CID, with the allegations that the petitioner through YouTube channel of one Ms. Riya Upreti published a video, where, he commented against Assamese women in Assam, mentioning that in Assam there is a place where girls practice black magic, witchcraft and can convert human beings into goats and other animals and later, at night, they can convert them back into human beings and establish physical relation to fulfill their lust.
3. It is alleged that such remarks are derogatory against Assamese women and were made with malicious intent to outrage the modesty of Assamese women and that it also amounts to spreading misinformation about the Assamese society. It is alleged that the petitioner with the intention of criminal conspiracy had attempted to promote malicious and disrespectful information about Assamese society. It is stated that subsequently when the controversy was brought to the notice of the petitioner, he issued an apology, marking, the police authorities as well.
4. It appears that when the instant criminal petition was filed the investigation was going on in the same case, but in the meantime, the investigation was completed resulting in a charge-sheet against the petitioner vide charge-sheet No.01/2025, dated 08.09.2025.
5. The charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner under the penal provisions of Sections 196(1), 197(1), 353(2) of BNS read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act and Section 4 of The Assam Witch Hunting (Prohibition, Prevention and Protection) Act, 2015 (herein after referred to as the Assam Witch Hunting Act).
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner supporting the contentions made in the petition submits that despite issuing an apology, a case has been registered against the petitioner.
7. It is submitted that the petitioner had absolutely no intention to hurt the feelings of Assamese people or Assamese women and he has not cast any aspersions constituting any offence under the Assam Witch Hunting Act.
8. It is submitted that he has been falsely and maliciously prosecuted. Hence, he is seeking the quashing of the criminal case by this Court, in exercise of powers under Section 528 BNS. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contention has relied upon the following decisions:-
(i) Amish Devgan Vs. Union of India and Ors. reported in (2021) 1 SCC 1
(ii) Manchu Mohan Babu Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Another reported in Criminal Appeal No. 3298 of 2025,
(iii) Mamta Shailesh Chandra Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ors. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 136,
(iv) Shiv Prasad Semwal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ors. reported in 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 251,
(v) Imran Pratapgadhi Vs. State of Gujarat and Another reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 678.
9. On the other hand, Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Additional P.P. appearing on behalf of the State submits that the ingredients of offences were made out and therefore, the case has been registered. The investigation has al
