Locus standi in Section 482 CrPC proceedings requires direct legal injury; a third party cannot challenge attachment proceedings.

A third party claiming only a family or derivative interest in property has no locus standi to invoke the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to challenge proceedings under Sections 82 and 83. The inherent and revisional powers are intended to prevent abuse of process and redress legal injury to a person aggrieved; ordinarily, the accused or directly affected person must challenge the proceedings. The liberal standing recognised in public interest litigation is confined to genuine public wrongs and does not permit a stranger to contest proceedings affecting another person. Mere assertion of interest, without invasion of a legally protected right, is insufficient.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person who is not the affected party, but claims an interest in the property, has locus standi to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to challenge proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of that Code.

Analysis: The inherent power of the High Court is wide, but it is to be exercised sparingly and only to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process. The revisional and inherent jurisdictions are meant to redress legal injury suffered by the person aggrieved. In ordinary criminal proceedings, it is for the accused or the person directly affected to challenge the action taken against him. The relaxation of locus standi recognised in public interest litigation is confined to genuine public wrongs and cannot be used by a third party to contest proceedings affecting another person. Mere assertion of a family or derivative interest in the property, without showing invasion of a legally protected right, does not confer standing.

Conclusion: The petitioner had no locus standi to maintain the application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the challenge was rejected.

---