https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469702 Availability of a revision against rejection of discharge did not bar the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC; the decisive question remained whether intervention was needed to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. The criminal proceedings were then considered unsustainable because the applicant had been exonerated on merits in a departmental enquiry arising from the same allegations, and the record in the criminal case did not prima facie disclose forgery, cheating, criminal breach of trust, or dishonest misappropriation. In those circumstances, continuation of the prosecution was treated as abuse of process, and the refusal to discharge was described as unsustainable. en-us Thu, 29 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:12:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469702 Availability of a revision against rejection of discharge did not bar the High Court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC; the decisive question remained whether intervention was needed to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice. The criminal proceedings were then considered unsustainable because the applicant had been exonerated on merits in a departmental enquiry arising from the same allegations, and the record in the criminal case did not prima facie disclose forgery, cheating, criminal breach of trust, or dishonest misappropriation. In those circumstances, continuation of the prosecution was treated as abuse of process, and the refusal to discharge was described as unsustainable. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469702