GAHC010047292026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : Crl.Pet./339/2026 MUSAHID ALI AND 5 ORS S/O MOMIN ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI,P.S. NAGAON SADAR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-

782002

2: KHAIRULISLAM S/O MAMIN ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782002

3: JIYABUR RAHMAN S/O MOMIN ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782002

4: TOWFIKA YASMIN @ TOIFIKA YASMIN W/O JIYABUR RAHMAN R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782002

5: ISMAHIL ALI S/O ISAB ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-782002

6: IBRAHIM ALI S/O ISAB ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON ASSAM PIN-78200 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM

2:MAHIMUDA KHATUN @ MAMUDA KHATUN W/O NASAR ALI @ NARSHED ALI R/O VILL- ROWMARI P.S. NAGAON (SADAR)

DIST.NAGAON ASSAM PIN- 78200 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR T H HAZARIKA, MR. K ISLAM,MR A RASHID,MR M CHETIA Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. A GANGULY(R2)

:: BEFORE ::

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

O R D E R

11.03.2026 Heard Mr. T.H. Hazarika, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam as well as the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.2.

2. This is an application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing the FIR dated 11.02.2026 in respect of Nagaon P.S. Case No.136/2026 under Sections

61(2)/87/351(2)(3) of the BNS, 2023.

3. On 10.02.2026, the 16 years old daughter of the informant was alone in the house. Taking advantage of that fact, the girl was kidnapped by the petitioners who confined the girl in their house.

4. Today, the informant has submitted that her daughter is now married and is living peacefully with her husband. She has submitted that she is not interested in prosecuting further in this case.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.

6. The guidelines for consideration of a petition under Section 482 of the CrPC (now Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 ) has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604. Paragraphs 102 and 103 of the judgment read as under:

“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.

(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.

(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused.

(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted