Quashing of FIR under inherent powers is limited to exceptional cases where no cognizable offence is disclosed.

An FIR will not be quashed under the inherent jurisdiction when the allegations disclose a cognizable offence and the challenge is directed mainly at the truthfulness or motive of the prosecution case. Quashing at the investigation stage requires restraint; the court should avoid a merits enquiry and interfere only in exceptional cases, such as where no cognizable offence is disclosed or non-interference would cause miscarriage of justice. On the material presented, no exceptional ground was shown, so the FIR was not quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the FIR was liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed a cognizable case and the challenge was essentially directed against the truthfulness and motive of the prosecution story. The governing principles for quashing an FIR require the Court to exercise restraint, avoid a merits enquiry at the investigation stage, and interfere only in exceptional cases where no cognizable offence is disclosed or where non-interference would result in miscarriage of justice. On the material placed, no such exceptional case was made out.

Conclusion: The FIR was not liable to be quashed and the petition failed.

---