Quashing of charge at framing stage must rest on prima facie review, not premature evaluation of evidence.

At the stage of framing charge, the court must confine itself to a prima facie assessment and must not weigh evidence as if conducting a full trial. Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash a charge is to be used sparingly, only in rare and exceptional cases to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice. Because the prosecution evidence had not been fully recorded and the High Court assessed the medical evidence on merits too early, the quashing was premature and legally unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in quashing the charge framed under Section 304 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code at a stage when the prosecution evidence had not been fully recorded.

Analysis: At the stage of framing of charge, the court is required only to see whether a prima facie case exists and is not to weigh the evidence as if conducting a trial. The power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash a charge is to be exercised sparingly and only in rare and exceptional cases where interference is necessary to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice. Since the prosecution evidence had not been completed and the High Court proceeded to assess the medical evidence as if deciding the merits of the charge, the approach was premature and legally unsustainable.

Conclusion: The quashing of the charge was not justified and the order of the High Court was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of charge, the court must confine itself to a prima facie assessment, and inherent jurisdiction to quash a charge cannot be used to pre-judge the merits of the prosecution case before the evidence is complete except in rare and exceptional cases.

---