Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Gau) 614

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Anjan Moni Kalita, J.
Smti Suman Beniwal, D/o-Shri Jai Narayan - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh, represented by the learned Public Prosecutor - Respondents
Crl. Petn. No. 48 (AP) of 2026
Decided On : 15-05-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. P.K. Tiwari, Sr. Adv. Mr. J. Tsering Kee, Adv.
For the Respondent: Ms. T. Jini, Addl. P.P. Mr. H. Lampu, Adv.

Criminal proceedings against a public servant for acts performed in good faith during the discharge of statutory duties are liable to be quashed when the essential ingredients of the alleged offence, particularly mens rea, are absent and the allegations are inherently improbable.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Section 528 - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Section 329 - Criminal trespass and house-trespass - Essential ingredients - Mens rea - Requirement of intent to intimidate, insult or annoy - Statutory protection for public servants - Acts done in good faith under official authority - Quashing of criminal proceedings - Principles for exercise of inherent powers - Allegations must not be absurd or inherently improbable. (Paras 10, 11, 20, 21, 22, 27)

Facts of the case:
A public servant, while performing official duties, seized forest produce suspected to be illegally obtained. A counter-complaint was filed against the official alleging criminal trespass and house-trespass, claiming the entry into the property was unauthorized and the structure was dismantled without legal process. The official sought to quash the criminal proceedings, contending that the actions were performed in good faith during the discharge of statutory functions.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the essential ingredients of criminal trespass, specifically the mens rea to intimidate, insult, or annoy, were absent. The actions were taken under the authority of relevant forest regulations, which provide immunity for acts done in good faith. The allegations were found to be inherently improbable, and the continuation of the criminal proceedings would constitute an abuse of the process of law.

Issues: Whether the allegations in the complaint disclose the essential ingredients of criminal trespass and house-trespass, and whether the petitioner is entitled to statutory protection for acts performed in the discharge of official duties.

Ratio Decidendi: Criminal trespass requires a specific intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult, or annoy the person in possession. Where a public servant acts in good faith under statutory authority, the absence of such mens rea precludes the commission of the alleged offences. Consequently, proceedings initiated against such officials for bona fide official acts are liable to be quashed to prevent the abuse of the legal process.

Result: Petition allowed; FIR quashed.

Table of Content
1. summary of factual background and filing of cross-firs between parties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. public servants' immunity and absence of mens rea in official conduct. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
3. statutory powers of forest officials and interpretation of criminal trespass. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25)
4. quashing criminal proceedings where allegations are inherently improbable. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
5. disposal of the petition and final judicial order. (Para 29 , 30)

JUDGMENT :

ANJAN MONI KALITA, J.

Heard Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Mr. J. Tsering Kee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. T. Jini, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, representing the State of Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. H. Lampu, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent no. 2.

2. The instant petition, under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, has been filed by the petitioner, praying for quashing and setting aside of the FIR dated 25.02.2026, in connection with Seijosa P.S. Case No. 02/2026, registered under Section 329 (2) of BNS, 2023.

3. An FIR was lodged on 12.02.2026, before Seijosa Police Station, Pakke Kessang District, by the petitioner along with other Forest Officials, alleging, inter alia that on 11.02.2026, while proceeding towards NEC road, Seijosa, on the basis of credible an information regarding illegal smuggling of timber, the petitioner, accompanied by her PSO, the driver noticed A- grade bamboo and wooden planks lying at an under-construction building near the ADC office, Seijosa; that on enquiry, workers present at the site failed to disclose the source of the timber and bamboo; that the petitioner informed the RFO, Seijosa Ms. Mopin Ete and collected the forest produced lying in the site; that in the meantime, the petitioner received a call from the DFO, Pakke Tiger Reserve, stating that Shri Takam Nabam had approached him and claimed ownership of the building and requested the materials not to be taken; that aforesaid Takam Nabam was informed that removal of bamboo from Reserved Forest without payment of royalty is impermissible and removal of timber from Reserved Forest is a punishable offence under Assam Forest Regulation, 1891; that he agreed to pay the royalty to the Government in due course and thus, the petitioner and her team left the forest produces at the location; that thereafter, when the petitioner proceeded to continue her official duty towards NEC road to act upon the input of illegal timber removal, 4-5 vehicles, led by Shri Patroce Nabam and Shri Jairam Nabam intercepted their vehicle and wrongfully restrained the petitioner and her team; that a mob of about 30-50 persons gathered and allegedly assaulted the petitioner and her staff; that the PSO was attacked and his mobile phone was snatched while recording the incident; that Smt. Yari Nabam and others also allegedly assaulted the petitioner and her team and the vehicle keys were forcibly taken; that due to obstruction and assault, the petitioner was prevented from proceeding to NEC road to discharge her official duty. In view of the aforesaid, having no other alternative, the petitioner lodged an FIR before Seijosa police station.

4. On receipt of the FIR dated 12.02.2026, Seijosa P.S. Case No. 01/2026, under Section 126(2)/74/132/189(2)/324(3) and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023, was registered.

5. Subsequent to the registration of the said FIR, by the petitioner, a counter FIR has been filed in the Seijosa P.S. at the instance of Smt. Yari Nabam, against the petitioner and other forest officials in respect of the same incident dated 11.02.2026. The FIR was registered under Section 329(2) of BNS, 2023, against the petitioner as one of the accused persons on 25.02.2026 after an enquiry by one ASI of Seijosa Police Station.

6. The aforesaid FIR was filed alleging that the complainant Smt. Yari Nabam, a resident of A-1 village, Seijosa, is the owner of the plot of land situated in front o