Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section-482 in Neeraj Kumar Chadha vs State Of Karnataka on 29 May, 2025Matching Fragments
13. The learned AGA, appearing for the respondent No.1 submits that though the petition was filed under Articles - 226 and 227 of Constitution of India but read with Section-482 of Cr.P.C., and in view of the circular the matter was listed before the roster bench dealing with criminal petitions under Section-482 of Cr.P.C. She further submitted that, the nomenclature under which the petition filed is not quite relevant, but the power which has been exercised by the Court requires to be considered. The learned Single Judge exercised the power under Section-482 of Cr.P.C as the remedy sought is for quashing of criminal proceedings i.e., the FIR registered and charge-sheet filed there on against the appellants. That apart, even for the sake of arguments, if it is taken that the High Court has exercised power under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, the same amounts to exercise of power under criminal jurisdiction, which is akin to exercise of power under Section-482 of Cr.P.C. In that view of the matter, the writ appeal is not maintainable under Section-4 of the Act of 1961. To buttress her arguments she relied on the judgment of a Coordinate Bench in the case of SRI. LAXMAN AND OTHERS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS9, wherein this Court held that the writ appeal is not maintainable.
18. Section-482 of Cr.P.C. is an inherent power. In other words it is the power with which the High Court existed, which enjoins the power to the High Court with the opening words that nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to give effect to any orders under this Code, or to prevent abuse of process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
19. As per the circular issued by the Registry of this Court dated 10.02.2012 wherein if any party seeks quashing of FIR, charge-sheet and other proceedings initiated under the provisions of Cr.P.C., in any writ under Article-226 / 227, was directed to include Section-482 of Cr.P.C. and the matter requires to be posted before the Bench having the roster of criminal matters under Section-482 of Cr.P.C.
22.1. So far as the judgments relied on by the party-in- person is concerned in the case of SREEMAD JAGADGURU SHANKARACHARYA, supra the Division Bench of this Court declined to entertain appeal against the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The reason for the same has been precisely stated in paragraph No.11, which we have already reproduced above.
22.2. In the case of SRI. LAXMAN AND OTHERS vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS case supra, this Court is of the view that the learned Single Judge has exercised power under Section-482 of Cr.P.C., though the petition is filed under Articles- 226 and 227 read with Section-482 of Cr.P.C., and in that eventuality held that the writ appeal is not maintainable as per paragraph no.21 of the judgment.
57. The another contention raised by the petitioner is that the paramour of respondent No.3 said to be influencing the police/advocate and even the Punjab and Haryana High Court, that cannot be accepted. Merely, because in the matrimonial case, his advocate not filed statement of objections even after receiving fee, the petitioner cannot suspect entire judicial system in Panjab and Haryana State. On this ground charge sheet cannot be quashed."
24. It is clear from the judgment of this Court in the case of SREEMAD JAGADGURU SHANKARACHARYA SHREE SHREE RAGHAVESHVARA SWAMI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS, supra that the nomenclature used in the petition is not the criteria to consider that the petition in fact filed for exercise of power under Article-226 of Constitution of India. Though petition is filed under Articles-226 and 227 of Constitution of India, but the same is read with Section-482 of Cr.P.C. In that view of the matter, the petition was actually filed one under Section-482 of Cr.P.C.