When does requiring an accused to stand trial on such an FIR amount to an abuse of process of law?

Where the FIR does not disclose commission of the offences alleged without anything being added to its recitals, and the allegations other than the vague ones would not, even if taken as true, make out a case against the accused, asking him to stand the trial is nothing but an abuse of process of law, and non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice.

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.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India