Section 482 Cr.P.C. relief requires full disclosure; suppression of prior orders can justify rejection for abuse of process.

Section 482 Cr.P.C. jurisdiction is equitable and requires full, candid disclosure of all material facts. Suppression of earlier orders and repeated attempts to secure relief contrary to prior judicial directions amount to abuse of process; a litigant who approaches the court with unclean hands is not entitled to indulgence. The application was therefore liable to be rejected because material facts were concealed and the process of law was misused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. deserved to be entertained where the applicant had concealed material facts and earlier orders, thereby abusing the process of court.

Analysis: The discretionary jurisdiction invoked under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is equitable in nature and requires full and candid disclosure of all material facts. Suppression of relevant orders and repeated attempts to obtain relief in disregard of earlier judicial directions amount to abuse of process. A litigant who approaches the court with unclean hands is not entitled to indulgence.

Conclusion: The application was liable to be rejected because the applicant suppressed material facts and misused the process of law.

---