Section 482 of the present Code is the ad verbatim copy of Section 561 A of the old Code. This provision confers a separate and independent power on the High Court alone to pass orders ex debito justitiae in cases where grave and substantial injustice has been done or where the process of the Court has been seriously abused. It is not merely a revisional power meant to be exercised against the orders passed by subordinate Courts.

Inherent powers-In dealing with this class of cases it is important to bear in mind the distinction between a case where there is no legal evidence or where there is evidence which is manifestly and clearly inconsistent with the accusation made and cases where there is legal evidence which on its appreciation may or may not support the accusation in question.

In complaint cases, at the first instance, the court should direct serving of the summons along with the copy of the complaint. If the accused seem to be avoiding the summons, the court, in the second instance should issue bailable warrant. In the third instance, when the court is fully satisfied that the accused is avoiding the courts proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted to. Personal liberty is paramount, therefore, we caution courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing non-bailable warrants.

In State of West Bengal and Others Vs. Sujit Kumar Rana, this Court while dealing with the nature of inherent powers of the High Court held that the inherent power of the High Court is saved only where an order has been passed by the criminal court which is required to be set aside to secure the ends of justice or where the proceedings pending before a court amounts to abuse of the process of court. The power u/s 482 of the Code can be exercised by the High Court in relation to a matter pending before a criminal court or where a power is exercised by the Court under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA K.K. Velusamy  Versus  N. Palanisamy (Before : R. V. Raveendran and A. K. Patnaik, JJ.) Civil Appeal Nos. 2795-2796 of 2011 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 18211-18212 of 2010) : Decided On: 30-03-2011 Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 18, Rule 17 read with Section 151—Recall of witness—There is no specific provision in CPC enabling parties to re­open evidence […]

Manohar Lal Chopra Versus Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal-Inherent jurisdiction of the court to make orders ex debito justitiae is undoubtedly affirmed by S. 151 of the Code, but that jurisdiction cannot be exercised so as to nullify the provisions of the Code. Where the Code deals expressly with a particular matter, the provision should normally be regarded as exhaustive.

The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. are not for that purpose controlled by Section 320 Code of Criminal Procedure. Having said so, we must hasten to add that the plenitude of the power under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. by itself, makes it obligatory for the High Court to exercise the […]

31. The inherent power under Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure. is intended to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice. Such power cannot be exercised to do something which is expressly barred under the code of Criminal Procedure. If any consideration of the facts by way of review is not […]

Recent Updates