TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the criminal proceedings, at the stage when the prosecution evidence was almost complete and the accused had not yet been questioned under Section 313(a), was maintainable.
Analysis: The proceedings had earlier been challenged in a similar petition under the inherent jurisdiction, and the earlier round had already been dismissed after detailed consideration of the objections. By the time of the present petition, several witnesses had been examined and the matter had reached the stage of questioning the accused. The Court held that the contentions sought to be raised should be urged before the trial court when the question of framing of charges or discharge arises. It further held that the inherent power under Section 482 cannot be invoked where the Code provides an adequate statutory remedy, particularly at this stage of the trial, and that the second quash petition appeared to be intended to delay the proceedings.
Conclusion: The petition for quashing was not maintainable and was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should not be exercised to quash pending criminal proceedings when the accused has effective remedies before the trial court and the matter has reached the stage of framing of charges or examination under Section 313(a).
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
