“In Indian Oil Corpn, (2006) 6 SCC 736, a Two Judge Bench reviewed the precedents on the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482. A criminal proceeding can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint do not disclose the commission of an offence under The Penal Code. Though the law does not require that the complaint reproduce the legal ingredients of the offence verbatim, the complaint must contain the basic facts necessary for making out an offence under The Penal Code. Appellants relied on State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy, (1977) 2 SCC 699: “In the exercise of wholesome power, High Courts are entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed”. The jurisdiction under Section 482 has to be exercised with care. An attempt has been made to cloak a civil dispute with a criminal nature despite the absence of the ingredients necessary to constitute a criminal offence.”
– Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Prof R.K. Vijayasarathy v. Sudha Seetharam, [Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 2019].
“The contours of the jurisdiction under Section 482 are far too well settled to require articulation or reiteration.”
– Hon’ble Justice K.M. Joseph, Sandeep Khaitan v. JSVM Plywood Industries Ltd., [Criminal Appeal No. 447 of 2021] decided on 22.04.2021.
You must be logged in to post a comment.