https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20937 A petition under section 482 CrPC to challenge a summoning order in a complaint case was held not maintainable at that stage because the order was treated as interlocutory and section 397(2) barred revisional interference. The High Court applied the principle that inherent powers should not be used to bypass an express statutory bar or an available alternative remedy. An accused summoned in such circumstances must first seek recall of the process before the Magistrate; only after refusal can further challenge be pursued. On the facts alleged in the complaint, the case did not disclose such exceptional abuse of process as to justify immediate quashing. en-us Wed, 28 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 11:56:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20937 A petition under section 482 CrPC to challenge a summoning order in a complaint case was held not maintainable at that stage because the order was treated as interlocutory and section 397(2) barred revisional interference. The High Court applied the principle that inherent powers should not be used to bypass an express statutory bar or an available alternative remedy. An accused summoned in such circumstances must first seek recall of the process before the Magistrate; only after refusal can further challenge be pursued. On the facts alleged in the complaint, the case did not disclose such exceptional abuse of process as to justify immediate quashing. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=20937