Letters Patent Appeal maintainability in FIR quashing writs referred to Full Bench over original versus criminal jurisdiction conflict.

A conflict in Division Bench authority concerned whether a Letters Patent Appeal lies from a Single Judge's order in a writ petition under Article 226, read with Section 482 CrPC, seeking quashing of an FIR. One line of authority treated such proceedings as falling within criminal jurisdiction and therefore barred intra-court appeal, while another treated the petition as an exercise of the High Court's original jurisdiction despite its criminal-law context. Because the issue affected the Delhi High Court's appellate jurisdiction and required authoritative resolution, the question was referred to a Full Bench.

---

---

Issues: Whether a Letters Patent Appeal lies against an order of a Single Judge passed in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing an FIR, or whether such proceedings are to be treated as having been decided in criminal jurisdiction and therefore barred.

Analysis: The Bench noticed conflicting Division Bench views on whether a writ petition seeking quashing of an FIR invokes the High Court's extraordinary original jurisdiction or its criminal jurisdiction. The controversy arose because one line of authority treated such proceedings as criminal in nature for the purpose of the bar on intra-court appeal, while another treated a writ petition under Article 226 as original jurisdiction notwithstanding its criminal-law setting. In view of the conflict and the importance of the question for the Delhi High Court's appellate jurisdiction, the matter was not decided finally in the present order.

Outcome: The question was referred to a Full Bench for authoritative determination.

---