Criminal proceedings arising from civil disputes, specifically where no criminal intent or ingredients of offences like cheating or breach of trust are disclosed, constitute an abuse of process and should be quashed to prevent them from becoming instruments of harassment.

BEFORE

HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA

O R D E R

Date : 29.04.2026.

Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. P. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 is filed for setting aside and quashing of the proceedings in C.R. Case No. 55/2025, pending in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate [S] No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati and the impugned order dated 23.05.2025, passed by the learned Trial Court upon the complaint lodged by the respondent/informant as a Narazi Petition to a Final Report submitted by the Investigating Officer of Gorchuk Police Station Case No. 196/2013.

3. The brief fact of the allegations made in the complaint are inter alia to the effect that one Smti Y.P. Borah (present respondent) approached the petitioners for purchasing the possessory right of a plot of land measuring 1 Katha, covered by Dag No.1104/704 situated at village Paschim Baragaon, Mouza Jalukbari in Kamrup (M) District from the present petitioners and accordingly the petitioner No. 1 Md. Nekibur Rahman sold the possessory right of the said plot of land to the respondent by executing an unregistered deed on 25.05.2011 and the respondent/informant paid a consideration amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs) to the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No. 2 is the wife of the petitioner No.1.

4. Mr. Borah, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent was aware at the time of purchasing the possessory right of the aforesaid plot of land that the said plot of land was Government land and not Myadi Patta land in as such the Patta No. of the said land was not mentioned in the aforesaid unregistered deed dated 25.5.2011. Further, from the perusal of the aforesaid deed dated 25.5.2011, it is apparent that the Petitioner No. 1, projecting himself to be the possessor of the said plot of land, sold only the possessory right to the respondent. However, quite surprisingly, the respondent filed a complaint before the Prime Minister's Office which was ultimately registered as the Garchuk PS Case No. 196/2013, under Sections 120(B)/406/420/34 of the IPC, against the present petitioners and some other persons. In the said complaint it was alleged that the complainant purchased a plot of land from the Petitioner No. 1 but they were evicted from the said plot of land by the Government. It was alleged that the Petitioner No.1 sold the said plot of Government land to her by projecting himself to be the owner and possessor of the said land.

5. After completion of investigation of the aforesaid Garchuk PS Case No. 196/2013, the Final Report was submitted vide No. 279/223 dated 31.7.2023, inter alia stating that “the matter was civil dispute”. Being aggrieved by the said Final Report, the respondent filed a complaint vide petition No.6159 against the same and the learned SDJM (S) No.1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati, on 17.01.2025 passed an order to register a complaint case and forwarded the record of the case to the learned CJM, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati and finally the learned CJM, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati vide order dated 24.01.2025, directed for registering the petition No.6159 as a complaint case and transferred the same to the Court of learned SDJM No. 1, Kamrup (M) for trial and disposal. Accordingly, the CR Case No. 55/2025 was registered and the learned SDJM No. 1, Kamrup (M) has issued Notice to the opposite party vide order dated 29.01.2025.

6. T