JUDGMENT

Manish Choudhury, J. - The present criminal petition has been preferred seeking invocation of inherent jurisdiction of this Court conferred under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (''the Code'' and/or ''the CrPC'', for short) for setting aside and quashing of the First Information Report (FIR) lodged by respondent no. 2-informant (hereinafter also referred to as ''the informant'', for easy reference), on 05.12.2016, before the Commissioner of Police, Guwahati. The said FIR has been registered as Basistha Police Station Case no. 1318/2016 (G.R. Case no. 13890/2016) on 08.12.2016 for offences punishable under Sections 419/498A/506, Indian Penal Code (IPC).

2. Heard Mr. M.H. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent no. 1, State of Assam. This Court on 06.05.2020 heard them in part. As the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 was found absent on call on that day, the matter stood deferred till today to enable the respondent no. 2 to present her case. Though the names of the learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 are reflected in the cause-list, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent no. 2 today also on call. On 06.05.2020, it was observed that in the event of non-representation on the next date fixed, the Court would proceed with the matter. Accordingly, the matter is taken up for consideration.

3. It is submitted by Mr. Choudhury that the petitioner is an Ex-Member of Parliament (MP), presently aged about 70 years. On the other hand, the informant is a Government servant, presently serving in the Public Work Department, Government of Assam in the Assam Secretariat, Guwahati. He has submitted, by referring to the contents of the FIR, that even if all the allegations made therein are accepted to be true then also none of the ingredients for the offences under Section 419, IPC and Section 498A, IPC can be said to be present for investigation and prosecution. He has further submitted that there are also no ingredients to attract the offence punishable under Section 506, IPC.

wxyz

3.1. He has further submitted that in the FIR, the informant has averred that the marriage between her and the petitioner was solemnized on 19.04.2002 and since then, she started living with the petitioner as the second wife of the petitioner. Mr. Choudhury has further submitted that in the year 2013, the informant had preferred an application, F.C.(Civil) Case No. 31/2013, before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup at Guwahati (''the family court'', for short) under Section 281 of the Mohammedan Law seeking restitution of conjugal rights. In support of his submission, he has referred to the contents of the said application, annexed as Annexure-A to this criminal petition. After receipt of notice in F.C. (Civil) Case No. 31/2013, the petitioner had contested the application before the family court by filing his written statement (Annexure-B) the proceedings of which had, thereafter, continued till the year 2016.

zyxw

wxyz

3.2. After continuance of the proceeding of F.C.(Civil) Case No. 31/2013 for a number of years the informant, on 17.09.2016, had suddenly decided to withdraw the said application and to that effect, she had submitted a petition before the family court, seeking leave to withdraw the same. On her submission that she was not willing to proceed with the case, the family court had allowed withdrawal of the said application and disposed of the case i.e. F.C. (Civil) Case No. 31/2013 on withdrawal. After such withdrawal on 17.09.2016, the informant had lodged the FIR on 05.12.2016.

zyxw

wxyz

3.3. In the above obtaining fact situation, Mr. Choudhury has submitted that the present FIR has been filed with the sole mala fide intention to cause harassment to the petitioner.

zyxw

4. Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has submitted that from the FIR, it transpires that the respondent no. 2-informant is