Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in exercising inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash criminal prosecution before commencement of trial.
Analysis: The extraordinary power to quash criminal proceedings is to be exercised sparingly and only to secure the ends of justice. It is not to be used to short-circuit the normal course of a criminal trial, particularly at a stage when evidence has not been led and the case does not fall within exceptional categories warranting pre-trial interference. The High Court's appreciation of the sufficiency or unsatisfactory nature of evidence at that stage was premature and beyond the proper scope of Section 482 jurisdiction.
Conclusion: The High Court was not justified in quashing the prosecution, and its order could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The prosecution was restored and directed to proceed to trial expeditiously, with no expression of opinion on the merits of the defence.
Ratio Decidendi: Inherent jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings must be exercised sparingly for the ends of justice and not to cut short a normal criminal trial except in exceptional cases.