Gauhati High Court
Kalyan Kumar Sarma And 3 Ors vs The State Of Assam on 13 July, 2026
Page No.# 1/13
GAHC010136032026
2026:GAU-AS:9501
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet./979/2026
KALYAN KUMAR SARMA AND 3 ORS
S/O LATE MRIGEN SARMA, R/O BELTOLA TINIALI, KRISHNA ARJUN PATH,
HOUSE NO. 18, P.S. BELTOLA, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM
2: SMTI RUPJYOTI SARMAH
W/O- LATE MRIGEN SARMA
R/O- HOUSE NO. 18
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
GUWAHATI
BASISTHA POLICE STATION
KAMRUP METRO
P..S SONAPUR
ASSAM
3: SMTI SEWALI BASUMATARY
D/O- BIJAY BASUMATARY
RESIDENT OF NABUDOI PATH
HOUSE NO. 13
GHURAMARA
GUWAHATI
P.S. HATIGAON
DIST. KAMRUP METRO.
4: SMTI. POONAM MAHANTA BRAHMA
W/O- KALYAN KUMAR SARMA
R/O- BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
BYELANE NO. 5
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
GUWAHATI
P.S. BASISTHA
Page No.# 2/13
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K BHUYAN, MR. M K DAS,MS Z ANJUM,MS. B
CHETRY,MR. A DAS
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
Linked Case : Crl.Pet./982/2026
SMTI RUPJYOTI SARMAH AND ANR
W/O LATE MRIGEN SARMA
R/O BELTOLA TINIALI
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
P.S. BELTOLA
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
2: SMTI POONAM MAHANTA BRAHMA
W/O- KALYAN KUMAR SARMA
R/O- BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
BYE LANE NO. 5
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
H/NO. 18
GUWAHATI
P.S. BASISTHA
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
Page No.# 3/13
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHUYAN
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Linked Case : Crl.Pet./985/2026
KALYAN KUMAR SARMA AND 3 ORS
S/O- LATE MRIGEN SARMA
R/O- BELTOLA TINIALI
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
P.S. BELTOLA
DIST.- KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
2: SUNNY MAHANTA BRAHMA
S/O- HEMA MAHANTA
R/O- SONAPUR
JALUKBARI
P.S. SONAPUR
DISTRICT- KAMRUP (M)
3: MEENAKSHI BRAHMA
W/O- DIPANKAR MAHANTA
R/O- WIRELESS OPP-BSNL
OFFICE RD
GUWAHATI
4: HEMA MAHANTA
W/O- SURENDRA NATH MAHANTA
P.O./P.S. SONAPUR
VILL.- PUNIGAON CHARIALI ITACHALI
DIST.- NAGAON
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE LD. PP ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHUYAN
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Page No.# 4/13
Linked Case : Crl.Pet./981/2026
SMTI RUPJYOTI SARMA AND 3 ORS
W/O LATE MRIGEN SARMA
R/O BELTOLA TINIALI
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
P.S. BELTOLA
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
2: SMTI POONAM MAHANTA BRAHMA
W/O- KALYAN KUMAR SARMA
R/O- BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
BYE LANE NO. 5
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
H/NO. 18
GUWAHATI
P.S. BASISTHA
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
3: SUNNY MAHANTA BRAHMA
S/O- HEMA MAHANTA
R/O- SONAPUR
JALUKBARI
P.S. SONAPUR
DIST. KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
4: MEENAKSHI MAHANTA BRAHMA
W/O- DIPANKAR MAHANTA
R/O- WIRELESS
OPP- BSNL OFFICE ROAD
GUWAHATI.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHUYAN
Page No.# 5/13
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Linked Case : Crl.Pet./986/2026
SMTI RUPJYOTI SARMAH AND 4 ORS
W/O LATE MRIGEN SARMA
R/O HOUSE NO 18
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
GUWAHATI
BASISTHA POLICE STATION
KAMRUP (M)
P.S. SONAPUR
DIIST.- KAMRUP (M)
2: SMTI. POONAM MAHANTA BRAHMA
W/O- KALYAN KUMAR SARMA
R/O- BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
BYELANE NO.5
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
GUWAHATI
P.S. BASISTHA
DIST.- KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
3: SUNNY MAHANTA BRAHMA
S/O- HEMA MAHANTA
R/O- SONAPUR
JALUKBARI
P.S. SONAPUR
DIST.- KAMRUP (M)
4: MEENAKSHI BRAHMA
W/O- DIPANKAR MAHANTA
R/O- WIRELESS OPP-BSNL
OFFICE RD
GUWAHATI
5: HEMA MAHANTA
W/O- SURENDRA NATH MAHANTA
P/O/P.S. SONAPUR
Page No.# 6/13
VILL- PUNIGAON CHARIALI ITACHALI
DIST.- NAGAON
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE LD PP
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHUYAN
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Linked Case : Crl.Pet./984/2026
SMTI POONAM MAHANTA BRAHMA AND 2 ORS
W/O KALYAN KUMAR SARMA
R/O BELTOLA TINIALI
BHETAPARA ROAD
BYELANE NO 5
KRISHNA ARJUN PATH
HOUSE NO. 18
GUWAHATI
P.S. BASISTHA
DIST. KAMRUP (M)
ASSAM
2: SUNNY MAHANTA BRAHMA
S/O- HEMA MAHANTA
R/O- SONAPUR
JALUKBARI
P.S. SONAPUR
DIST.- KAMRUP (M)
3: SMTI. SEWALI BASUMATARY
D/O- BIJAY BASUMATARY
RESIDENT OF NABUDOI PATH
HOUSE NO. 13
GHURAMARA
GUWAHATI
P.S. HATIGAON
KAMRUP (M)
VERSUS
Page No.# 7/13
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY THE LD PP
ASSAM
------------
Advocate for : MR. A K BHUYAN
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
ORDER
13.07.2026
1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. A. K. Bhuyan assisted by learned counsel
Mr. N. R. Sharma for the petitioners namely, (i) Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma,
(ii) Shri. Sunny Mahanta Brahma, (iii) Smt. Meenakshi Brahma, and (iv) Smt.
Hema Mahanta and learned counsel Mr. N. K. Das is present for the petitioners
namely, (i) Shri. Kalyan Kumar Sarma, (ii) Smt. Rupjyoti Sarmah, and (iii) Smt.
Sewali Basumatary.
2. The petitioners have jointly filed this applications registered as
Crl.Pet./979/2026, Crl.Pet./981/2026, Crl.Pet./982/2026, Crl.Pet./984/2026,
Crl.Pet./985/2026, and Crl.Pet./986/2026.
3. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. D. P. Goswami for the
respondent State.
4. A slew of cases have been filed and there are several litigations pending
between both the parties registered as PRC Case No. 165/2022 under Sections
Page No.# 8/13
498(A)/307/506 of the IPC arising out of FIR registered as All Women P.S. Case
No. 12/18 lodged by Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma.
5. Another FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 57/2018 under Sections
379/506 of the IPC was lodged by Smt. Rupjyoti Sarma and this FIR was
lodged against the petitioners Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma, Shri. Sunny
Mahanta Brahma and Smt. Meenakshi Brahma.
6. Another FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 1186/2017 under Sections
294/379/323/506 of the IPC was lodged by Smt. Rupjyoti Sarma against Smt.
Poonam Mahanta Brahma.
7. Another FIR registered as Hatigaon P.S. Case no. 159/2018 under Sections
120(B)/354/341/506/34 of the IPC was lodged by Smt. Sewali Basumatary
against the petitioners Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma and Shri. Sunny Mahanta
Brahma and this FIR was registered as PRC Case No. 1722/2021.
8. FIR being Basistha P.S. Case No. 33/18 was registered under Sections
120(B)/294/392 of the IPC read with Section 5 of the Assam land Grabbing (P)
Act, 2010, was lodged by Shri Kalyan Kumar Sarma against the petitioners Shri.
Sunny Mahanta Brahma, Smt. Meenaskhi Brahma and Smt. Hema Mahanta.
9. The FIR registered as All Women P.S. Case No. 11/18 under Sections
448/354/352/506/34 of the IPC was lodged by Smt. Rupjyoti Sarma agasint the
petitioners Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma, Shri. Sunny Mahanta Brahma, Smt.
Meenaskhi Brahma and Smt. Hema Mahanta, and this FIR was registered as
PRC Case No. 327/2020.
Page No.# 9/13
10. As the petitioners are family members and as the petitioners have amicably
settled their dispute, the petitioners have jointly filed several petitions with
prayer to quash and set aside the FIR, Charge-sheet and the proceedings
pending against them.
11. The petitioner Smt. Poonam Mahanta Brahma is the wife of Shri. Kalyan
Kumar Sarma and Smt. Hema Mahanta is the mother of petitioner Smt. Poonam
Mahanta Brahma. Smt. Meenakshi Brahma is the sister of Smt. Poonam
Mahanta Brahma. Shri. Sunny Mahanta Brahma is the son of Hema Mahanta. In
this way all the petitioners except Smt. Sewali Basumatary are related.
12. The criminal petitions are taken up together and decided by this Court by a
common order as the petitioners are related. The basis of the cases leading to
the above mentioned criminal cases is on the backdrop of family disputes.
(i) Criminal petition No. 979/2026 has been
filed jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to
quash the proceedings of PR Case No. 165/2022 arising out
of All women P.S. Case No. 12/18; and pending in the court
of the CJM, Kamrup(M).
(ii) Criminal petition No. 981/2026 has been filed
jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to quash
the FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 57/2018;
(iii) Criminal petition No. 982/2026 has been filed
jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to quash
Page No.# 10/13
the FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 1186/2017;
(iv) Criminal petition No. 984/2026 has been filed
jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to quash
the proceedings of PRC Case No. 1722/2021 arising out of
Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 159/2018 and pending in the court
of the JMFC, Kamrup(M).
(v) Criminal petition No. 985/2026 has been filed
jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to quash
the FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 33/18; and
(vi) Criminal petition No. 986/2026 has been filed
jointly by the above named petitioners with prayer to quash
the proceedings of PRC Case No. 327/20 arising out of All
Women P.S. Case No. 11/18, and pending in the court of
the Special JMFC, Kamrup(M).
13. The parties were already embroiled in a family dispute and several cases
have been filed against each other. The parties have decided to settle their
dispute. They are not willing to proceed with the criminal cases brought up
against each other.
14. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners.
15. Learned counsel for the petitioners have relied on a decision of the Hon’ble
Page No.# 11/13
Supreme Court in Naushey Ali & Ors Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78, wherein it has been held that:-
“21. In State of MP. v. Laxmi Naravan after discussing the ratio in Narinder
Singh v State of Punjab and other judgments this Court held (Laxmi Narayan
case, SCC pp. 704-705, para 15)
15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on
the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:
15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the
criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of
the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil
character particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out
of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have
resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;
15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved
heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape,
dacoity, etc Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact
on society;
15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the
special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed
by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely
on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;
15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc would fall in the
category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as
crime against the society and not against the individual alone and therefore, the
criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 107 IPC and/or the Arms
Act, etc, which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in
exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code on the ground that the
parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the
High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of
Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It
would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of
Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of or the prosecution has collected
sufficient evidence which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under
Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by
the nature of injury sustained whether such injury is inflicted on the
vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an
exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is
collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed
and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still
under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7
Page No.# 12/13of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and
to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;
15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the
criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are
private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground
that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender the
High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused the conduct
of the accused namely whether the accused was absconding and why he was
absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a
compromise etc.”
16. Reverting back to this case, it is held that as all the above criminal cases are
based on family disputes and as the parties have settled their dispute amicably,
it appears that this is a fit case to invoke the inherent jurisdiction under Section
528 of the BNSS, 2023 as the matters have been amicably settled. Possibility of
conviction appears to be remote and bleak. Further proceedings will indeed be
an abuse of the process of the Court.
17. I have also considered the submission made by the learned Additional Public
Prosecutor.
18. In the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Naushey Ali &
Ors (Supra), the proceedings of:-
PRC Case No. 165/2022 arising out of All women P.S. Case No. 12/18 in
Crl.Pet./979/2026;
FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 57/2018 in Crl.Pet./981/2026;
FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 1186/2017 in Crl.Pet./982/2026;
PRC Case No. 1722/2021 arising out of Hatigaon P.S. Case No. 159/2018 in
Crl.Pet./984/2026;
FIR registered as Basistha P.S. Case No. 33/18 in Crl.Pet./985/2026; and
PRC Case No. 327/20 arising out of All Women P.S. Case No. 11/18 in
Page No.# 13/13Crl.Pet./986/2026,
are thereby set aside and quashed.
18. In terms of the above observation, all these petitions are disposed of.
19. No order as to costs.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
