Section 482 quashing limits reaffirmed: disputed facts and prima facie allegations must be tested at trial, not in inherent jurisdiction.

In proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the High Court reiterated that it cannot determine the truth of disputed facts, weigh evidence, or accept a defence version at the quashing stage. Where a complaint alleging offences under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act has already been taken cognizance of, the sufficiency of allegations and the existence of a prima facie case are matters for trial, not for interference in inherent jurisdiction. On that basis, the request to quash the complaint was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal original petition seeking quashing of the complaint was maintainable on the grounds that there was no complaint from investors, no independent witnesses were examined, and the allegations were insufficient for interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The complaint alleged offences under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 and had already been taken cognizance of by the trial court. The Court relied on settled law that, in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it cannot assess the truthfulness of disputed facts, weigh evidence, or test the defence version. The existence of a prima facie case and the sufficiency of allegations for trial are matters to be examined in the criminal proceedings themselves, not in quashing jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to quashing of the complaint, and the criminal original petition failed.

---