Abstract

As per Black’s dictionary, the term “Quash” means “To overthrow; to abate; to
vacate; to annual; to make void”. In ordinary terms, quash would mean to stop and put an end
to the criminal proceedings, be it at Chargesheet filled stage or FIR filed stage. Under the
scope of the powers of High Court, under rarest of rare cases, may quash FIR/Chargesheet.
An accused person can pray for quash of the FIR or Chargesheet ("CS") filed against him/her
before the Hon'ble State High Court under section 482 of the CrPC which gives inherent
powers to the Court. So the main objective of this paper is to focus on the inherent powers of
the High Court with special reference to the quashing charges. This paper starts with an
introductory part which gives a gist about the quashing powers of the High Court, and the
definition part. Then the statutory interference of Indian Penal Code (1860), the constitution
of India (1950) and the criminal procedure code (1973). The paper concludes by saying the
two contradictory approaches regarding the section 482 of CrPC along with the scope of the
subordinate judiciary in this matter.

KEYWORDS: Charesheet, FIR, statutory interference, subordinate judiciary, quashing of

charges.

INTRODUCTION

In a recent verdict pronounced by three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court headed

by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, the Court expounded the scheme underlying Section 482 of
CrPC and the circumstances under which a High Court can exercise its inherent power to
quash FIR or criminal proceeding. Here it would be relevant to mention that Section 482 of
CrPC saves the inherent powers of High Court and states that nothing in the CrPC shall limit
the High Court’s inherent power to give effect to any order made under the CrPC or to
prevent abuse of process of any Court or to secure the ends of justice.1 It is under the 37th
chapter of the code titled “Miscellaneous”. The state High Courts in India have been given
supervisory and regulatory powers over the conduct of the lower criminal courts within their
respective territorial jurisdiction, including inherent powers.

Faced with a false criminal complaint, a person can file a petition under section 482 of the
code with the state high court and seek quashing of the criminal complaint. Inherent powers
include powers to quash FIR, investigation or any criminal proceedings pending before the
HC or any courts subordinate to it and are of wide magnitude and ramification. Such powers
can be exercised to secure ends of justice, prevent abuse of the process of any court and to
make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this code, depending
upon the facts of the case.2

1
https://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/laws/quash-fir-482-crpc.html
2
https://phdessay.com/section-482-of-crpc-and-powers-of-quashing-of-fir/
DEFINING INHERENT POWERS

In a general sense, inherent powers are those that permanently exist in a particular
authority by virtue of its very existence without being derived from any other authority.
Different law dictionaries and Judges have defined the term inherent powers as follows:

(a) Black‟s Law Dictionary defines „inherent powers‟ as “Existing in something as a

permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute.”3

(b) Webster‟s New World Law Dictionary defines it as “A power that must be deemed to
exist in order for a particular responsibility to be carried out.”

(c) John Bouveier defined inherent powers as “An authority possessed without its being
derived from another. It is a right, ability or faculty of doing a thing, without receiving that
right, ability or faculty from another.”

(d) Justice Anderson defined4 inherent powers as “The power of each court over its own
process is unlimited; it is a power incident of all courts, inferior as well as superior; were it
not so, the court would be obliged to sit still and (to) see its own process abused for the
purpose of injustice. The exercise of the power is certainly a matter of the most careful
discretion.”

By a simple understanding of the various definitions it appears that any authority vested with
any power or responsibility needs certain ancillary/allied powers to discharge the said
responsibility properly and effectively and the same principle applies to judicial
authorities/courts as well.5

STATUTORY INTERFERENCE

I. SECTION 482 OF CrPC:- It lays down, “Saving of inherent powers of High Court.
Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the
High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under
this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the
ends of justice.”6 The language of provision shows it is an enabling provision,
declaring for the sake of clarity that High Court‟s power is not affected and that as
superior Court it has power of interference for meeting the ends of Justice. Nowhere
is there any suggestion for exclusion of the Magistrate‟s power to invoke the
provisions of Section 482.7

3
Oxford Dictionary, „inherent‟ <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/inherent>
4
Cocker v Tempess 1841
5
Extract from the article titled “Scope of subordinate judiciary under section 482 of crpc” published on NUJS
Journal of regulatory studies. ISSN (O) No: 2456-4605. P-89
6
Bare act, criminal procedure code, 1973.
7
Supra note 5, p-90
 TWO CONTRADICTORY APPROACHES REGARDING SECTION 482:

One school of thought holds that just like any other Court of Law the
Magistrates too have inherent powers and it exists by virtue of the basic principle that
no legislation can provide for in anticipation to address all situations that possibly can
arise in future and therefore, the Courts have inherent power to pass necessary orders
for ends of justice in such circumstances. And there exists a contrary view that the
Magistrates do not enjoy any inherent powers for the simple reason that Section 482
CrPC does not confer or reserve any such power directly or expressly on the
Magistrates.8
(1) In 1977, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Bindeswari Prasad’s Case9 held, “Even if
Magistrate had any jurisdiction to recall the order, it could have been done by another
judicial order after giving reasons that he was satisfied that a case was made out for
recalling the order. We, however, need not dilate on this point because there is
absolutely no provision in The Criminal procedure Code of 1898 (which applies to
this case) empowering a Magistrate to review or recall an order passed by him.
Criminal Procedure Code does contain a provision for inherent powers, namely,
Section 561A which, however, confers these powers on the High Court and the High
Court alone. Unlike Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code, the Subordinate Criminal
Courts have no inherent powers. In these circumstances, therefore, the learned
Magistrate had absolutely no jurisdiction to recall the order dismissing complaint”.

(2) In Pritam Singh v State10, the Allahabad High Court resorted to a judicious, as
distinct from hyper technical, approach and interpreted this provision to mean that
subordinate Criminal Courts have inherent powers and held that, “in case of an order
which is a nullity there is no reason why the court, having discovered the mistake be
not allowed to correct it and be compelled to adapt the lengthy process of referring the
case to the High Court. In this case Court made a distinction between an erroneous
order and an order which is a nullity and arrived at the finding that in case of
erroneous order the subordinate court has no inherent power to rectify the mistake.”
This judgement indicates that Magistrates do enjoy inherent powers under Section
482 of CrPC.

II. INTERFERENCE OF ARTICLE 226 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION:- The power of

quashing the criminal proceedings had to be exercised very sparingly and with
circumspection and that too in the rarest of rare cases and the court cannot be justified
in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of
allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the extraordinary and inherent powers
of court do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to act accordingly to its
whims or caprice. However, the court under its inherent powers, can neither intervene
at an uncalled for stage nor it can “soft-pedal the course of justice” at a crucial stage

8
A. S. Ganraya v S. N. Thakur AIR1986 SC 1440
9
Bindeshwari Prasad Singh v Kali Singh AIR 1977 SC 2432
10
AIR1969 ALL 513.
 of investigation/ proceedings. The provisions of articles 226,227 of the constitution of
India and section 482 of the code are a device to advance justice and not to frustrate it.

III. POWERS CONFERED UNDER SECTION 498A OF IPC:- Specific to the criminal
proceedings in 498A case, SC clarified the position on non-compoundable offences
which are matrimonial in nature in B.S. Joshi and Ors v. Satae of Haryana11,as under

While exercising inherent power of quashing under s.482 of crpc it is for the HC to
take into consideration any special features which appear in a particular case to
consider whether it is expedient and in the interest of justice to permit a prosecution to
continue. Where, in the opinion of the court chances of an ultimate conviction is bleak
and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal
prosecution to continue, the court may, while taking into consideration the special
facts of the case, also quash the proceedings. The special features in such matrimonial
matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements
of matrimonial disputes.12 The object of introducing chapter XX-A containing s.498A
in the IPC was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her
husband. Section 498A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his
relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy
unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper-technical view would be counter-productive
and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this
provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to
quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women for settling
earlier. That is not the object of chapter XX-A if IPC. Hence the HC in exercise of its
inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and section 320
of the code does not limit or affect the powers under section 482 of the code.13

QUASHING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

1. GUIDELINES TO QUASH FIR

In the landmark case State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal14, a two-judge bench of the
Supreme Court of India considered in detail, the provisions of section 482 and the
power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings or FIR. The Supreme Court
summarized the legal position by laying the following guidelines to be followed by
High Courts in exercise of their inherent powers to quash a criminal complaint:

 Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint,
even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not
prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.
 Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if
any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an

11
AIR 2003 SC 1386
12
R.V.kelkar, Lectures on Criminal Procedure, p-367,368
13
https://www.shoneekapoor.com/quashing-criminal-proceedings/
14
AIR 1992, SCC 335
 investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under
an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
 Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected
in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and
make out a case against the accused.
 Where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but
constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a
police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section
155(2) of the Code.
 Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and
inherently improbable on the basis of which, no prudent person can ever reach
a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the
accused.
 Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the
Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to
the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or, where there is a
specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
 Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or
where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to
private and personal grudge.15
2. RULES OF PROCEDURE TO QUASH CHARGESHEET
Rule 1:- Charge Sheet or FIR can be quashed in case of any technical fallacy either in
the FIR or in the investigation report of the Police. Quashing of CS & Quashing of
FIR have same effect i.e., nullifying the criminal case against you but Quashing of
Charge Sheet is certainly better as that would mean you have waited patiently post the
FIR and after the Police investigation is over you have challenged even the Police
Investigation on some concrete grounds. Once CS is Quashed against you which
means even the Investigation by Police proved that you were innocent. After
investigation completes and all material is collected still if the case does not inspire
confidence or no case is made out then you have all the grounds to quash the CS.
Rule 2:- If charges have been framed then you have the option to go in for revision
(Charge Sheet Rules) .
Rule 3:- Before framing of charges you have other options also viz., to apply for
discharge u/s 239 for all your relatives named in the FIR. You also have the option to
file counter case u/s 211, 506 & 511. This counter case will mean that one sword will
hang on your opponent party’s head and if whenever the case is proved to be false
then that sword will fall on your opp party name of this sword is JAIL or
CONVICTION.

15
http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/697362/trials+appeals+compensation/Overview+Of+Section+482+CrPC+Vi
sVis+The+Landmark+Judgments+Of+The+Supreme+Court+Of+India
 Rule 4:- Quashing of Chargesheet u/s 482 is done after court presents the chargesheet
and before charges are framed and trial is underway. The rules for quashing are the
same as were laid down in Bhajan Lal Versus State of Haryana which were
subsequently M/s Zhandu Pharmaceuticals & many other cases.
Rule 5:- If Quashing is rejected then it won’t harm your case but if certain negative
observations are marked then that might hurt your case. NOTE:- If any derogatory
remarks are written by you which you can prove to be wrong legally then of course
Criminal Defamation can be filed against any authority which writes derogatory
remarks against you.
Rule 6:- Whenever you file for Quashing then do also mention one additional prayer
for speedy trial (expedient trial) to dispose of the matter within certain period (For
498A and others it should be 6 months; Please refer Sec. 21-B of Hindu Marriage Act
/ 40-B Of Special Marriage Act whichever is applicable) as facing lengthy trial
deprives personal liberty as per Article 21 of Indian Constitution. So that in case
quashing is rejected then at least this prayer of yours will help you get speedy justice.
Rule7:- If you feel that Police have some malafide intentions against you, then CS
QUASH success can be achieved if investigation can be discredited by citing some
inherent error or malpractice in the investigation process – You need to prove the
malafide intent of the police authorities to implicate you.
Rules (General):- On completion of investigation if Investigation Officer ("IO")finds
sufficient materials to prosecute the accused, then IO files CS before the court. After
that court takes cognizance & sends accused to trial. If there is an inordinate delay in
filing CS say 2 or 3 years from date of FIR then you can ask the IO to give you
discharge certificate.

CONDITIONS TO DETERMINE TO VERACITY OF PRAYER FOR QUASHING

When an accused raise the prayer for quashing, by invoking the power vested in the
HC under section 482 of the code, following steps were provided by SC in Prashant Bharthi
v. State of NCT of Delhi16.

1) Whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and
indubitable, i.e., the material is of sterling and impeccable quality?
2) Whether the material relied upon by the accused, would rule out the assertions
contained in the charges levelled against the accused, i.e., the material is sufficient to
reject and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint the material is
such, as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis
of the accusations as false.
3) Whether the material relied upon by the accused, has not been refuted by the
presecution or complainant; and the material is such, that it cannot be justifiably
refuted by the presecution or complainant?
4) Whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court, and
would not serve the ends of justice?

16
AIT 2013 SC 2753 AJR 469.
 If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial conscience of the HC should
persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings, in exercise of power vested in it.

CONCLUSION