Saving of inherent powers of High Court
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with saving of inherent powers of High Court. Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
Section 482, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 528 Saving of inherent powers of High Court Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-18.pdf 2021-04-13 (not same-date order-19 ROP). Crl A 330/2021. While a 482/226 quash is pending, High Courts must not pass blanket 'no coercive steps' / stay-investigation orders as a routine; police have a statutory right and duty to investigate cognizable offences; interim relief in a quash is rarest-of-rare and must be reasoned. Modern successor to the Bhajan Lal 482 line (Bhajan Lal itself still has no CNR). Map CrPC 482 and successor BNSS 528. Combined already has HC Salamat on 482; this is the SC teaching file.
On this section: Inherent power under s.482 (and Art 226) does not authorise a routine stay of investigation or a blanket no-coercive-steps order while a quash is pending.
-
Devendra Kishanlal Dagalia vs Dwarkesh Diamonds PVT LTD
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Once a Magistrate has examined a complaint, taken cognizance of an offence, and issued summons under Section 204 Cr.P.C., the Magistrate cannot thereafter recall or review that order by invoking Section 201 Cr.P.C. (which applies only to cases where the Magistrate is initially not competent to take cognizance). Relief post-issuance of summons must be sought before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Article 227 of the Constitution. Additionally, a complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act is maintainable at any court having territorial jurisdiction over any location where any one of the five essential components of the offence (drawing, presentation, dishonour, notice, and non-payment within 15 days) occurred, and the complainant has discretion to choose such a court.
On this section: Provides inherent power to High Court. Referenced as proper remedy available to aggrieved party after summons has been issued by Magistrate, rather than recall at Magistrate level.
-
Udai Shankar Awasthi vs State of U. P
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a criminal complaint is filed many years after an alleged instantaneous offence (not a continuing offence), beyond the prescribed limitation period under Section 468 CrPC, without plausible explanation for delay, by a litigant who has exhausted all civil and arbitral remedies and lost therein, and where earlier complaints on substantially identical facts have been dismissed on merits, and where material facts such as earlier dismissals have been suppressed, the complaint constitutes an abuse of the process of court and is liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC, regardless of the gravity of the alleged offence or the availability in law to prosecute crimes after long periods. The court must protect innocent persons from harassment by unscrupulous litigants who seek to weaponize criminal proceedings as a tool for vengeance after civil defeat.
On this section: Grants court power to quash criminal proceedings where the same constitutes abuse of process. Court invoked this section to quash the present complaint as proceedings were barred by limitation and constituted abuse of process by frustrated litigant.
-
R. Shashirekha vs State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
For an offence under Section 306 IPC (abetment to suicide) to be constituted, there must be a proximate and positive act of instigation by the accused with close temporal proximity to the commission of suicide by the victim, creating a clear nexus between the act of instigation and the act of suicide. A significant time gap between the alleged instigation and the suicide, combined with the absence of any direct causal connection, is sufficient to break the nexus and preclude the constitution of the offence. However, when the High Court exercises its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR, it must examine the investigation material and provide reasoned findings as to why the material does not constitute the alleged offence, rather than making casual observations without substantive analysis.
On this section: High Court's inherent jurisdiction to quash FIR - the Court held that the High Court should not conduct a mini-trial but should examine whether a prima facie case is made out; the High Court erred in quashing Section 420 charges without providing reasons.
-
Badrinarayana Jaganathan vs The State of Karnataka
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal proceedings initiated on allegations that fail to disclose prima facie ingredients of the offences charged, where the underlying dispute is fundamentally civil in nature (employment termination), and where procedural irregularities and discrepancies suggest deliberate misclassification of the matter to transform a civil dispute into criminal proceedings for purposes of coercion or settlement, constitute an abuse of legal process and travesty of justice warranting quashing of the chargesheet and proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The essential ingredients of criminal offences must be strictly established: Section 323 requires voluntary act of causing actual hurt; Sections 504 and 509 require specific intentional insult with contextual details and intent to provoke or shock sense of decency; Section 506 requires threat with intent to cause alarm, not mere assertion of consequences of lawful termination. Mere allegations without substantiation of these ingredients do not justify continuation of criminal proceedings.
On this section: Inherent power to quash proceedings - Court exercised this power to quash chargesheet and criminal proceedings as abuse of legal process and travesty of justice
-
Mohammed Abdulla Khan vs Prakash K
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A newspaper owner can be prosecuted for defamatory content published in the newspaper under Sections 500, 501, and 502 IPC if the elements of the offence are satisfied. The question of whether the respondent committed the acts constituting the offence with the requisite intention or knowledge cannot be determined at the stage of cognizance without examining evidence. The High Court erred in quashing the complaint against the newspaper owner under Section 482 CrPC without examining the substantive question of criminal liability. The trial court must proceed with the case and examine the evidence to determine the guilt of the respondent.
On this section: Provides power to High Court to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that this power should not be exercised casually and that questions of criminal liability cannot be determined at the stage of cognizance without examining evidence.
-
Jagdish Upasane & Ors. Etc vs State of Rajasthan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The availability of a remedy under Section 397 Cr.P.C. (criminal revision) does not, by itself, constitute a bar to the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the High Court. While the inherent power should be exercised sparingly and with self-restraint, there is no total prohibition on its exercise. The inherent power can and should be exercised where there is abuse of process of the court or other extraordinary circumstances demanding interference to secure the ends of justice, even if alternative remedies are available. The non-obstante clause in Section 482 preserves the inherent powers despite any other provision in the Code.
On this section: The inherent powers of the High Court to make orders necessary to give effect to any order under the Code, to prevent abuse of process, or to secure ends of justice. Court held that the non-obstante clause in this section preserves inherent powers despite other provisions in the Code.
-
J. Ramesh Kamath vs Mohana Kurup
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Criminal charges involving misappropriation of organizational funds by office bearers in positions of fiduciary trust cannot be characterized as purely personal or civil disputes amenable to quashing under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code based on settlement agreements, even when accepted by all parties including complaining members and current office bearers. The High Court must refuse to quash criminal proceedings in such cases because they involve crimes of breach of trust against the organization and society, and the timing of settlement after completion of investigation and charge-sheet filing demands that the trial court be allowed to determine guilt or innocence on evidence presented at trial. The distinction between Section 320 (compounding) and Section 482 (inherent jurisdiction) does not permit circumvention of the principles that serious offences involving breach of organizational trust and fiduciary duty are not amenable to settlement, regardless of whether all parties subsequently agree to compromise.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court - interpreted as granting broad discretionary jurisdiction to quash criminal proceedings to secure ends of justice or prevent abuse of process, but limited by requirement that courts maintain integrity of criminal justice system and not quash proceedings in cases with serious criminal dimensions
-
D. P Gulati, Mngr. Acct. M/s Jetking Infotra vs The State of U. P & ANR
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When criminal proceedings are initiated as a counter-blast or retaliatory measure to pressure a party who has filed a prior legitimate criminal complaint against the initiator, such proceedings constitute an abuse of the process of law and should be quashed at the threshold under Section 482 CrPC, particularly when the allegations appear frivolous and the sequential filing pattern demonstrates harassment rather than genuine prosecution.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court to quash criminal proceedings; the Court extensively analysed when and how this power should be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law.
-
Surya Baksh Singh vs State Of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The High Court possesses inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC to dismiss criminal appeals filed by convicts who deliberately obtain bail or exemption from surrender and thereafter wilfully abscond or fail to prosecute their appeals, provided the Court has first taken reasonable steps to secure the appellant's presence (including proceedings against sureties). However, such dismissal should be preceded by examination of the case on merits where practicable, and the Court must ensure that the appellant has had a fair opportunity to be heard. The ends of justice, which include protection of society and victims' rights alongside convict rights, justify application of Section 482 to prevent abuse of the appellate process by convicts seeking to circumvent their sentences.
On this section: Preserves inherent powers of High Court to make orders necessary to give effect to any order under CrPC, prevent abuse of process, or secure ends of justice; central provision for this judgment
-
Mohit @ Sonu vs State of U. P.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An order of a trial court refusing to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is not a purely interlocutory order within the meaning of Section 397(2) Cr.P.C. because it substantially affects the rights of the accused by determining whether they will face trial. Therefore, such order must be challenged through revisional jurisdiction under Sections 397/401 Cr.P.C., not through inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Additionally, when any court (whether exercising revisional or inherent jurisdiction) passes an order prejudicial to the rights of an accused or any person, such person has a fundamental right to notice and opportunity of hearing as mandated by Section 401(2) Cr.P.C. and the principles of natural justice before such prejudicial order is passed. The inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised only when no other specific remedy is available in the Code.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice; properly invoked only when no other remedy is available and specific circumstances warrant intervention
-
C. P. Subhash vs Insp. of Police Chennai
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a criminal complaint discloses prima facie commission of an offence with specific factual allegations, the High Court's powers to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of Constitution should not be invoked except in rare and compelling circumstances. The High Court cannot interfere with ongoing investigation merely on the ground that allegations may not be sustained on complete evidence, or that related civil proceedings are pending, or that the matter involves document authenticity which will be decided in civil suit. Section 195(1)(b)(ii) Cr.P.C. bar on cognizance applies only to offences committed with respect to documents while they are in court custody (custodia legis), not to documents forged before being produced in court. Whether accused actually committed forgery and what offence was committed is exclusively a matter for investigation and trial, not for prejudging by the High Court at investigation stage.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court to quash proceedings. Court reiterated that these powers are wide but must be exercised cautiously; High Court should not interfere with ongoing investigation except in rare and compelling circumstances.
-
Prashant Bharti vs State of Nct of Delhi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When material evidence of sterling and impeccable quality - consisting of documentary records (judgment and decree of divorce, marriage certificate) and scientifically-generated electronic evidence (call detail records) - conclusively establishes that the factual basis of criminal accusations is false and that the allegations cannot be substantiated in trial, the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code ought to be exercised by the High Court to quash criminal proceedings at the stage of charge framing or trial, as proceeding further would constitute abuse of court process and denial of justice to the innocent accused, even though the prosecution has filed a chargesheet based on complainant's statement.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court - court's power to quash criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice when accusations are demonstrated to be false through unrefuted material
-
Deepak Bansal vs State of Punjab
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The National Commission for Scheduled Castes, while possessing procedural powers of a civil court for the limited purpose of conducting investigation and inquiry into complaints relating to deprivation of rights and safeguards of scheduled castes, does not have the power to issue binding directions in the nature of interim or mandatory injunctions, nor can it direct police to reinvestigate criminal matters, add specific sections to FIRs, or order arrest of accused persons. The powers of the National Commission are purely recommendatory in nature, and any directions issued by it must be understood as recommendations to the State Government or appropriate authorities, not as binding orders capable of execution or enforcement. The National Commission cannot interfere with ongoing police investigations or assume substantive powers of adjudication that are not explicitly vested in it by the Constitution or statute.
On this section: Cited to establish principles regarding inherent powers of High Court in interfering with investigations. Court drew analogy that if High Court has limited powers under Section 482, NCSC with no inherent powers cannot interfere with investigations.
-
Pratyaksha Pal Choudhary vs Paritosh Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When parties to a matrimonial dispute enter into a comprehensive written settlement agreement providing for division of assets, transfer of property, and mutual dissolution of marriage, and both parties express unambiguous consent in person before the Supreme Court, the Court can exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution to: (1) dissolve the marriage by passing a decree of divorce by mutual consent; (2) waive the statutory waiting period normally required for divorce by mutual consent; (3) make the settlement agreement binding on both parties; (4) quash and dispose of all concurrent criminal proceedings (FIR and criminal revision petitions) pending in other courts as part of comprehensive settlement if parties consent; (5) quash and dispose of all concurrent civil proceedings (applications under Domestic Violence Act and other laws) pending in other courts as part of comprehensive settlement if parties consent; and (6) consolidate multi-jurisdictional proceedings into a single Supreme Court order to provide complete finality and prevent fragmented litigation. The exercise of Article 142 powers is appropriate where matrimonial settlement includes property transfer documented and registered, parties are present in person confirming consent, and consolidation of proceedings prevents further litigation burden and serves ends of justice.
On this section: Provision relating to criminal revision jurisdiction of High Court; CRLMP No. 8664/2024 filed by respondent under this section before High Court of Rajasthan, Jodhpur Bench, quashed and disposed in settlement
-
Sumit Arora vs State Govt. of Nct of Delhi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When both parties to a matrimonial dispute have voluntarily settled their differences through an amicable settlement deed, all financial obligations have been fulfilled, the complainant has no objection to quashing, and continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose but only create further acrimony, the High Court may exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS) to quash the FIR in the interest of justice, particularly in family matters.
On this section: Inherent powers of High Court to quash criminal proceedings in the interest of justice
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… RESPONDENT(S) J U D G E M E N T K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J. 1. A disgruntled wife, is the petitioner in this Special Leave Petition, aggrieved with the invocation of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[1]( page-0-0) by the High Court of Allahabad to quash a proceeding initiated by the petitioner under Section 156(3) of the Cr.PC. The second respondent herein who is the husband of the petitioner along with the third and fourth respondents who are his parents, approached the …
-
… which acquired the subject land after payment of consideration, was arrayed as one of the accused alleging offences under the above provisions along with the Tehsildar and the power of attorney holder of the lands, alleging criminal conspiracy. 2. The respondent herein successfully filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure[3]( page-1-0) . The impugned order which quashed the F.I.R. No. 10 of 2021 is the subject of challenge in the S.L.P. We have heard learned Counsel Sh. Pashupathi Nath Razdan appearing for the State and learned Counsel Sh. Nanu Khera appearing for the first respondent. <span …
Questions about Section 482
What have the courts held on Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (13 Apr 2021) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Inherent power under s.482 (and Art 226) does not authorise a routine stay of investigation or a blanket no-coercive-steps order while a quash is pending. Another 15 judgments on this section are set out below, 14 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2025.
How do I find court cases under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: CRPC 482, section 482 CRPC, section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 16 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (13 Apr 2021).
What should I read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 528 (Saving of inherent powers of High Court), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, commonly called quashing of fir or inherent powers of high court, and cited as CRPC 482, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.