https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387188 Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to quash an FIR on the basis of seriously disputed facts or the accused's defence version at the threshold; such issues must be tested by evidence at trial, so the quashing order was unsustainable. A revisional order passed without notice to the respondent suffered from procedural defect, but the proper course was to set it aside and remit the matter for fresh hearing after notice. The quashing relief was therefore undone, the proceedings were restored, and the revisional court was directed to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law. en-us Thu, 17 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Oct 2019 07:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387188 Inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC cannot be used to quash an FIR on the basis of seriously disputed facts or the accused's defence version at the threshold; such issues must be tested by evidence at trial, so the quashing order was unsustainable. A revisional order passed without notice to the respondent suffered from procedural defect, but the proper course was to set it aside and remit the matter for fresh hearing after notice. The quashing relief was therefore undone, the proceedings were restored, and the revisional court was directed to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 17 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387188