Gauhati High Court
Crl.Pet./1222/2025 of SRI RAMAN CHOUDHURY Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR on 8 September 2026
GAHC010220932025 2026:GAU-AS:13085 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1222/2025 SRI RAMAN CHOUDHURY S/O- SRI. AMAR KUMAR CHOUDHURY PERMANENT RESIDENT OF - GAJ PURIYA ROAD, RAJA MAIDAM, .O. AND P.S.-JORHAT, DISTRICT- JORHAT,
GAHC010220932025
2026:GAU-AS:13085
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./1222/2025
SRI RAMAN CHOUDHURY
S/O- SRI. AMAR KUMAR CHOUDHURY PERMANENT RESIDENT OF- GAJ
PURIYA ROAD, RAJA MAIDAM, .O. AND P.S.-JORHAT, DISTRICT- JORHAT, ASSAM PRESENTLY RESIDING AT- VANSHEE ELDORADO APARTMENT, MARATHAHALL I- SARTAPUR OUTER RING ROAD, CHANDRA LAYOUT, MARATHAHALL-I, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI-06.
2:DR SWETA SADANI
C/O SRI. PREM RATAN SADANI
R/O HOUSE NO. 27
SHRISTI DHARMESWAR
DINESH OJHA PATH
BHANGAGARH
GUWAHATI-781005
DISTRICT- KAMRUP(M)
ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GOSWAMI, MR. R SHARMA,MS P SARMA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR. N KOTHARI(R2),MR P PRAWAR(R2),MR Y
KOTHARI(R2)
B E F O R E
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
09.09.2026 Heard Mr. S.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard learned counsel for respondent No. 2, and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing respondent No. 1.
2. This is an application filed under Section 582 read with Section 438 & section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 challenging the proceeding of Misc. D.V. Case No. 30/2024 initiated against the petitioner under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup(M), Guwahati. The said DV case has been filed by the respondent No. 2, who is the wife of the present petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to filing of this case, the respondent No. 2 had filed several cases, namely, case under Section 498A of IPC as well as separate case under Section 406 of IPC and a divorce case. He submits that the other criminal cases have been stayed by a co- ordinate bench of this Court.
4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the parties have now arrived at a settlement, whereby it has been agreed that all cases lodged against the petitioner by respondent No. 2 shall be withdrawn or steps shall be taken for the closure of the said cases. An additional affidavit has been filed by the petitioner incorporating a settlement agreement executed on 27.07.2026 between the petitioner and respondent No. 2, along with two other persons described as confirming parties. As per the said settlement agreement, a certain sum of money was agreed to be paid by the petitioner to respondent No. 2, and part payment of the same has been acknowledged. It was further agreed that the parties would immediately commence the legal processes required to give effect to the settlement and that the parties have decided to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent.
5. It is further stated in the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner that the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 has been amicably settled, and it has been agreed to withdraw all cases filed by respondent No. 2 and the petitioner, and they will also file a petition for mutual divorce.
6. Accordingly, it is submitted by the learned counsel for both parties that the pending proceedings in Misc. D.V. Case No. 30 of 2024, pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), may be quashed by this Court in exercise of its inherent powers.
7. Having regard to the settlement of the dispute between the parties and the stand taken by the complainant, it is the considered view of this Court that allowing the impugned proceedings to continue would amount to an abuse of the process of law. It is settled law that the High Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction, can pass appropriate orders to quash any proceedings to prevent such abuse of the process of law.
8. Therefore, in view of the above, the proceedings in Misc. D.V. Case No. 30 of 2024, presently pending before the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M), stand quashed.
9. Criminal Petition stands disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant