Abuse of process bars a second Section 482 application for the same relief after withdrawal of the earlier plea.

A second application under Section 482 CrPC seeking the same de-freezing relief after an earlier application had been withdrawn without pressing that prayer was held to be an abuse of process and not maintainable. The Court reasoned that re-agitating a relief already given up could not be permitted, so the High Court ought not to have entertained the later application. The impugned order allowing de-freezing was set aside and the criminal application stood dismissed. The broader question whether the bank accounts could otherwise have been frozen under the Code or the special enactment was left open.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a second application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking substantially the same relief after an earlier application had been withdrawn constituted an abuse of process and ought to have been entertained.

Analysis: The earlier application before the Division Bench had specifically included a prayer for de-freezing of bank accounts but was withdrawn without pressing that relief. The later application before the Single Judge sought the same substantive relief. In these circumstances, entertaining the subsequent application would permit re-agitation of a relief that had already been given up, which amounted to a manifest abuse of process. Since the threshold objection was sufficient to dispose of the matter, the question whether the bank accounts could otherwise have been frozen under the Code or the special enactment was left open.

Conclusion: The subsequent application was not maintainable and ought not to have been entertained; the challenge succeeded in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The impugned judgment permitting de-freezing of the bank accounts was set aside and the criminal application before the High Court stood dismissed, while the underlying question of law was left undecided.

Ratio Decidendi: A party cannot, after withdrawing an application in which a specific relief was sought and not pressed, invoke Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 again to obtain the same relief, as such a course constitutes abuse of the process of court.

---