Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC remains available despite a revision remedy, to prevent abuse of process and secure justice.

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that the availability of a revision remedy does not, by itself, bar invocation of the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC. The non-obstante language of Section 482 preserves the High Court's power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, and that jurisdiction is not excluded merely because a revisional remedy exists. A contrary view would unduly narrow the scope of Section 482. The High Court's order was therefore liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the availability of a revision remedy barred invocation of the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The impugned order proceeded on the footing that because a revision was available, the inherent powers under Section 482 could not be exercised. The settled position, as reaffirmed by the Court, is that the non-obstante language of Section 482 preserves the High Court's inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice, and the mere existence of a revisional remedy does not by itself exclude that jurisdiction. The contrary view would unduly restrict the scope of Section 482, which is impermissible.

Conclusion: The availability of an alternative revision remedy did not bar consideration under Section 482, and the High Court's order was liable to be set aside.

---