Devo Saikia and Anr vs The State of AP Advocate - P P of AP — Crl.Petn./107/2026
Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Of on 07th May 2026.
CNR: GAHC040006382026
Filing Number
Crl.Petn./241/2026
Filing Date
06-May-2026
Registration No
Crl.Petn./107/2026
Registration Date
06-May-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr. Justice Anjan Moni Kalita
Coram
Honourable Mr. Justice Anjan Moni Kalita
Bench Type
Single Bench
Judicial Branch
Criminal Section
Decision Date
07-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Disposed Of
Last updated 09-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Devo Saikia and Anr
Adv. Uttam Bori,Moni Bori,Moni Bori, ,Wanglak Wangsa,Moni Bori
-
2.Smti Dami @ Yami Dubi
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of AP Advocate - P P of AP
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
07-May-2026
Honourable Mr. Justice Anjan Moni KalitaView PDF
Case Summary: Crl.Petn./107/2026 The Gauhati High Court quashed criminal proceedings against husband Devo Saikia and wife Smti Dami @ Yami Dubi under Sections 305(a)/238 BNS (domestic assault and theft charges) after the parties executed a mutual settlement deed on 06.04.2026. The court invoked inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, holding that matrimonial disputes lacking serious societal impact may be quashed upon amicable settlement to prevent abuse of process, particularly where conviction chances are remote and continuation causes unnecessary hardship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.Petn./107/2026
Case Summary: Crl.Petn./107/2026 The Gauhati High Court quashed criminal proceedings against husband Devo Saikia and wife Smti Dami @ Yami Dubi under Sections 305(a)/238 BNS (domestic assault and theft charges) after the parties executed a mutual settlement deed on 06.04.2026. The court invoked inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS, holding that matrimonial disputes lacking serious societal impact may be quashed upon amicable settlement to prevent abuse of process, particularly where conviction chances are remote and continuation causes unnecessary hardship. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts