ANAND KUMAR MOHATTA & Anr. v. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) DEPARTMENT OF HOME

property by appellant No. 1 in the name of his wife also did not amount to commission of offence of Criminal Beach of Trust – Therefore, the prosecution is mala fide, untenable and solely intended to harass the appellants – FIR and charge-sheet are liable to be quashed – High Court erred in dismissing the petition under s. 482 Cr.P.C. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.482 – Petition under – For quashing of FIR – Maintainability of, when in the meantime charge-sheet is filed – Held: The inherent power u/s. 482 is conferred to prevent abuse of process of a court – The provision does not restrict the exercise of its inherent power to prevent abuse of process of the court only to the stage of FIR. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD:

It cannot be said that once the charge sheet is filed, petition for quashing of FIR is untenable. There is nothing in the words of Section 482 Cr.P.C. which restricts the exercise of the power of the Court to prevent the abuse of process of court or miscarriage of justice only to the stage of the FIR. It is settled principle of law that the High court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C even when the discharge application is pending with the trial court. It would be a travesty to hold that proceedings initiated against a person can be interfered with, at the stage of FIR but not if it has advanced, and the allegations have materialized into a charge sheet. On the contrary, it could be said that the abuse of process caused by FIR stands aggravated if the FIR has taken the form of a charge sheet after investigation. The power is undoubtedly conferred to prevent abuse of process of power of any court. [Paras 15 and 17] [1035-G-H; 1036-A-B, F-G]