AMIT MANI TRIPATHI v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS.
Court: High Court of Meghalaya
Bench: HON'BLE JUSTICE REVATI MOHITE DERE, CHIEF JUSTICE
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Meghalaya judgment dated 2026-07-29. AMIT MANI TRIPATHI v. STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Serial No. 02 Supplementary HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA List AT SHILLONG Crl. Petn. No. 105 of 2026 Date of order: 29. 07. 2026 Amit Mani Tripathi ... Petitioner - versus - 1. State of Meghalaya, represented by the Secretary, Home Department, Government of Meghalaya. 2. The In-Charge, Mawkynroh Police Outpost, Umshing Mawlai, Shillong, East Khasi Hills District. 3. Dr. Ravi Kant Mishra, S/o (L) Rajesh Mishra, H/N. P-16, NEHU Campus, Shillong, East Khasi Hills. ... Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Revati Mohite Dere, Chief Justice Appearance: For the Petitioner : Mr P. Yobin, Adv. with Mr B. Komi Adv. For the Respondents : Mr A. Kumar, AG with Mr A. H. Kharwanlang, Addl Sr GA Mr S. Sen, Adv. [R3] i) Whether approved for No reporting in Law journals etc. : ii) Whether approved for publication No in press: JUDGMENT: (Oral) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. Rule.
Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the parties and the aforesaid petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the FIR registered at the behest of the respondent No. 3 qua the petitioner with the Mawlai Police Station, being Mawlai P. S. Case No. 25(02)2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 351 of the BNS. 4. Quashing is sought on the premise that the parties i. e. , the petitioner and the respondent No. 3 have amicably settled their dispute. It appears that the respondent No. 3, a professor had filed a written complaint with the Mawlai Police alleging that the petitioner had made threatening WhatsApp calls, sent intimating messages to him and had also used abusive language. Pursuant thereto, the Police of the Mawlai Police Station registered an FIR as against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 351 of the BNS. The respondent No.
3 has appeared through VC and he is identified by his counsel, Mr. S. Sen. The respondent No. 3, who has appeared through VC states that he has no objection to the quashing of the said FIR only having regard to the fact that the petitioner is a student and that an FIR would jeopardise his career as such, he is giving his no objection, keeping in mind the future of the petitioner. 5. Considering that the parties i. e. , the petitioner and the respondent No. 3 have amicably settled their dispute and that the respondent No. 3 has given his no objection to the quashing of the FIR and keeping in mind the judgment of the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh & ors v. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 and several other judgments on this issue, there is no impediment in allowing this petition. Accordingly, the FIR registered with the Mawlai Police Station being Mawlai P. S. Case No. 25(02)2026 by the respondent No.
3 as against the petitioner, is quashed and set aside. 6. The petition is allowed and Rule is made absolute on the aforesaid terms. 7. Petition is, accordingly disposed of. 8. All parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (Revati Mohite Dere) Chief Justice
Source: High Court of Meghalaya. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.