In what categories of cases may a High Court exercise the power under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash criminal proceedings?
Coram: C.T. Ravikumar; Sanjay Kumar
No precise, clearly defined and inflexible guidelines or exhaustive list can be laid down, but the illustrative categories include allegations which taken at face value do not prima facie constitute any offence, materials that disclose no cognizable offence, allegations so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person could find sufficient ground to proceed, an express legal bar to the proceedings, and a proceeding manifestly attended with mala fide or maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive.
Constitution of India — Art.226 — Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.482 — Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.406, 420, 120-B — Quashing of FIR — Investigation stage — Vague allegations — Abuse of process of law — Constitution of India — Art.226 — Quashing of FIR not confined to s.482 — Held: Quashing of criminal proceedings is normally sought in exercise of the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482, Cr.P.C. That does not mean it cannot be done in invocation of the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution. (¶6) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s.482 — Interference at the investigation stage — Held further: The High Court may interfere with an investigation where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice, and may quash an FIR which discloses no offence without anything being added to or subtracted from its recitals. (¶8, 9) Constitution of India — Art.226 — Material beyond the averments in the FIR — Held further: The Court is not confined to the averments in the FIR when ascertaining whether the ingredients of the alleged offence are disclosed. It owes a duty to look into the other attending circumstances emerging from the record and to read in between the lines. (¶11) Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss.406, 420, 120-B — Vague allegations — Abuse of process — Held further: Where, besides vague allegations, the recitals even if taken as true disclose no offence against an accused, asking him to stand the trial is an abuse of process of law. FIR and further proceedings quashed qua the appellant; appeal allowed. (¶13, 14)
One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of Kim Wansoo v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India