Serial No. 01 Daily List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG Crl.Petn. No. 67 of 2025 Date of order: 09.02.2026 Flamingstar Sohkhlet ….Petitioner - versus -

1. State of Meghalaya through the Commissioner and the Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Department of Home (Police)

Civil Secretariat, Shillong.

2. Smti Rilangshisha Nongrum

3. Smti Arbina Ryndem ….Respondents Coram:

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Appearance:

For the Petitioner :Mr N.M. Mansuri, Adv.

For the Respondent :Mr K.P. Bhattacharjee, GA Ms A.P. Kharsahnoh, Adv. [for R2&3]

i) Whether approved for Yes reporting in Law journals etc.:

ii) Whether approved for publication Yes in press:

J U D G M E N T

By this petition preferred under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR dated 28th March, 2025 registered with the Rynjah Police Station, Shillong for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 106 (1), 125(b) and 281 of BNS and consequently, the proceeding pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Shillong, being G.R. Case No. 44 (A) of 2025. Quashing is sought on the premise that the petitioner and the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (legal heirs of deceased - late Kennystar Lyndem) have amicably settled the dispute and as such, the said respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have no objection to the quashing of the FIR and the proceeding.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR and the proceeding pending against the petitioner be quashed since post the filing of the charge-sheet i.e., during the pendency of the proceeding, the petitioner and the legal heirs of the deceased – late Kennystar Lyndem have resolved the dispute and as such, the legal heirs i.e., the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - the wife and the mother of the deceased respectively, have given their consent to the quashing of the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the offence is not heinous in nature and that the accident arose due to an unforeseen circumstance and since the legal heirs of the deceased i.e., the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 do not wish to pursue the proceedings, continuation of the same would cause unnecessary hardship to the petitioner and will be an abuse of the process of the law. Learned counsel relied on the judgments of the Apex Court reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 : Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : Narinder Singh & ors v. State of Punjab, and two judgments of this Court in Shri Derik Randall Jyrwa v. State of Meghalaya & anr passed in Crl. Petn. No.23 of 2019 on 19th August, 2019 and Shri Wisterly Mawrie v. State of Meghalaya passed in Crl.Petn. No. 63 of 2024 on 25th February, 2025, in support of his submission that quashing of an offence under Section 106 (1) of the BNS is permissible with the consent of the parties i.e., the accused and legal heirs of the deceased.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 supported the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. The facts in brief giving rise to the filing of the aforesaid petition are as under:

The incident in question took place on 18th March, 2025 in the morning. It is the prosecution case, that a vehicle (Celerio) bearing Registration No. ML05 X 9687, driven by the petitioner and occupied by one co-passenger was proceeding from Mawlai, Motsyiar, East Khasi Hills District, Shillong towards Tynring, East Khasi Hills District, when the incident took place. It is alleged that the petitioner lost control of the vehicle and it veered on to the wrong side of the road and collided with a scooty bearing Registration No. ML05 V 3065 which was driven by Kennystar Lyndem (deceased), who was coming from the opposite direction. In the said incident, Kennystar Lyndem sustained grievous injuries and was taken to the hospital where he subsequently, succumbed to his injuries. Post the incident, the aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioner alleging the aforesaid offences. After investigation