Gauhati High Court
Crl.Rev.P./61/2015 of SMTI RINJU CHAMUA Vs THE STATE OF ASSAM and ANR on 15 February 2026
GAHC010009562015 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./61/2015 SMTI RINJU CHAMUA W/O RABESH CHAMUA R/O JYOTINAGAR, PANIGAON KAC GOLI, P.O. PANIGAON, P.S. NAGAON, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and ANR
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010009562015
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./61/2015
SMTI RINJU CHAMUA
W/O RABESH CHAMUA R/O JYOTINAGAR, PANIGAON KAC GOLI, P.O.
PANIGAON, P.S. NAGAON, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM and ANR
2:MINAKSHI DAS
W/O BHUPEN DAS R/O SUTO HAIBOOR NAJIRAJAN P.O. SUTO HAIBOR P.S.
NAGAON SADAR DIST. NAGAON
ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MRA SHARMA, MR. D K BHATTACHARYYA, AMICUS CURIAE
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR
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
16.02.2026
Heard Mr. D K Bhattacharyya, learned Amicus Curiae representing the petitioner, appointed by this court. The learned Amicus Curiae has submitted that the operation of the impugned judgment and order dated 31.10.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagaon in Criminal Appeal No. 86/2012 affirming the judgment and sentence dated 11.10.2012 by the learned JMFC, Nagaon in CR Case No. 2048/2008 had been stayed by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2015. Thereafter, on 29.01.2016, the parties had submitted before this court that, a compromise petition was filed by both the parties but the same was not in record. The learned Amicus Curiae has submitted that in the records, he has searched, the compromise petition stated to have been filed by both the parties, is not found. It appears from the record that none has appeared for the petitioner on and from 15.12.2025. Considering entire aspect of the matter, this court is of the opinion that the present criminal revision petition needs to be closed for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the criminal revision petition is closed and disposed of. Further, this Court appreciates the services rendered by the learned Amicus Curiae. Registry is directed to do the needful for making payment of the fee of the learned Amicus Curiae for his assistance, as per notification.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant