Meghalaya High Court
1.Shri. Halbringston Masharing vs . 1.State Of Meghalaya, Represented By on 30 June, 2025
2025:MLHC:553
Serial No.29
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
Crl.Petn No.9 of 2025 Date of Order: 30.06.2025
____________________________________________________________
1.Shri. Halbringston Masharing Vs. 1.State of Meghalaya, represented by
S/o- Shri Armstrong Mangu the Chief Secretary Govt. of
R/o- Khlawblei Umpowin Village Meghalaya, Shillong.
Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya.
2. Shri Doston Masharing. 2. Officer-in-Charge, Umiam Police
S/o (L) S. Lamare Station, Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya
R/o Umpowin Pdeng Village,
Ri-Bhoi District, Meghalaya. 3. The Investigating Officer, Umiam
Police Station, Ri-Bhoi District,
Meghalaya.
.....Petitioners. .....Respondents.
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice B. Bhattacharjee, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Ms. P. Riahtam, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N. Syngkon, GA (R: 1 - 3)
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. Heard Ms. P. Riahtam, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners
and Mr. N. Syngkon, learned GA appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 – 3.
2. This criminal petition is filed seeking quashing of the G.R. Case
No.71 of 2023 under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427 and 304A of the Indian
Page 1 of 5
2025:MLHC:553
Penal Code arising out of the FIR dated 11-05-2022 pending in the Court of
the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nongpoh.
3. The petitioner No.1 is the accused person and the petitioner No.2 is
the complainant in G.R. Case No. 71 of 2023. The instant petition is filed
before this Court jointly by the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.2 by
asserting that both of them have settled/compromised the matter and the
petitioner No.2 is not interested to pursue any criminal proceeding against
the petitioner No.1. The deposition of the petitioner No.2 adduced before
the Trial Court wherein it was stated that the matter had been settled
between the parties, was made the prime basis of filing of this instant
petition. In addition, during the pendency of the matter, by the additional
affidavit dated 23-06-2025, a compromise deed dated 06-06-2025 entered
into between the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.2, was brought into
the record of this Court.
4. The fact of the case, as can be revealed from the materials on record
is that on 11-05-2022, the vehicle bearing registration No. ML10 C 1643
(Mahindra Supro HD Mini Truck) driven by the petitioner No.1 met with
an accident with another vehicle bearing registration No. ML10 C 0596
(Alto) which resulted in death of one (Late) Samjingshai Masharing
(brother of the petitioner No.2). Consequenly, the FIR dated 11-05-2022
was lodged by the petitioner No.2 before the Umiam police station. Upon
completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet vide charge-sheet
No.19/2023 dated 31-07-2023 under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304A
IPC was submitted against the petitioner No.1 in the matter. Thereafter,
the G.R. Case No. 71 of 2023 was initiated against the petitioner No.1
which is now pending trial before the Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Nongpoh. The case of the petitioners is that immediately after
Page 2 of 5
2025:MLHC:553
the incident, the petitioners No.1 & 2, being related to each other and
residing in the same village, have settled the matter amicably as the
occurrence of the accident was due to bad weather and not because of the
rash and negligent driving the petitioner No.1. Since, Sections 279, 304A
IPC are non-compoundable offence, the petitioners have no other remedy
but to approach this Court seeking quashing of the G.R. Case No. 71 of
2023.
5. Ms. P. Riahtam, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the
offences involved are purely private in nature having no bearing on the
general law and order situation of the State and there is no involvement of
any public element in the matter. The learned Counsel submits that the
occurrence of the accident on 11-05-2022 was an unfortunate incident
without intention or fault of any of the parties involved therein and, hence,
the criminal proceeding initiated against the petitioner No.1 needs to be
closed. She further submits that both the petitioners are related to each
other and residing in the same village and the petitioner No.2 does not
desire to press the criminal proceeding against the petitioner No.1. She
submits that the petitioner No.2 did not lodge the FIR to make any
allegation against the petitioner No.1, but only for the purpose of fulfilling
the legal requirement. The learned Counsel contends that since the
petitioners have voluntarily settled the matter, no meaningful purpose will
be served by allowing the criminal proceeding to continue before the Trial
Court and prays for quashing of the same. In support of her submission,
the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Crl.
Petn. No. 63 of 2024, Shri Wisterly Mawrie Vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors.
wherein in the similar facts and circumstances of the present case, the
criminal proceeding pending before the Trial Court had been quashed on
Page 3 of 5
2025:MLHC:553
the basis of the order dated 16-03-2021 passed in Crl. Petition No. 11 of
2021 and order dated 01-10-2021 passed in Crl. Petition No.34 of 2021.
6. Mr. N. Syngkon, learned GA appearing for the State-respondent Nos.
1 – 3 does not object to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioners and
submits that discretion of this Court be applied and necessary order be
passed in the matter.
7. From the submissions made and from the materials on record, it is
clear that FIR dated 11-05-2022 was lodged by the petitioner No.2 after the
accident which resulted in death of his brother. After completion of the
investigation and filing of the charge-sheet, the G.R. Case No. 71 of 2023
was initiated against the petitioner No.1 in the Court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Nongpoh which is now pending for trail. A perusal of the
deposition of the petitioner No.2 recorded during the course of the trial on
11-12-2024 reveals that the petitioner No.1 is the uncle of the petitioner
No.2 and that after the funeral of the deceased, the family members of both
the petitioners have settled the matter. It is also apparent that during the
pendency of the matter, the petitioner No.1 and the petitioner No.2 have
entered into a compromise deed dated 06-06-2025 voluntarily out of their
own free will and decided not to pursue the criminal case pending before
the Trial Court. Thus, there appears to be no doubt insofar as
settlement/compromise of the matter between the petitioner No.1 and the
petitioner No.2 is concerned.
8. In the decision of Shri Wisterly Mawrie(supra) relied on by the
learned Counsel for the petitioner, this Court had allowed quashing of a
proceeding under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304A IPC. There is no
dispute between the parties before this Court that the facts and situations
Page 4 of 5
2025:MLHC:553
involved in the present case is similar and identical to the facts and
situations involved in the case of Shri Wisterly Mawrie(supra). Hence, this
Court finds no reason to decline the prayer made by the petitioners.
9. Resultantly, the further proceeding of G.R. Case No. 71 of 2023
under Sections 279, 337, 338, 427, 304A IPC pending in the Court of Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Nongpoh is quashed.
10. The criminal petition stands allowed.
Judge
Meghalaya
30.06.2025
“Biswarup PS”
Page 5 of 5
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by BISWARUP
BHATTACHARJEE
Date: 2025.06.30 16:49:21 IST