Col. B.S. Khatri vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ... on 28 July, 2003
It will be seen from the quation above that the Supreme Court has consistently said that the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of Cr.P.C. should be very sparingly done in case of Rashmi Kumar v. Mahesh Kumar Bhada. The Supreme Court has sounded a word of caution, stating that such power should be sparingly and cautiously exercised only when the court is of the opinion that otherwise there will be gross miscarriage of justice. It is therefore necessary for us to follow this caution and examine whether any miscarriage of justice is likely to be caused by not quashing the proceedings. It will be seen that what is impugned before us is the order passed under Section 156(3) of the Code which directs investigation into the complaint by a particular wing of the police. What is going to be the outcome of that investigation is not known. Everything that can happen thereafter can be scrutinised and rescrutinised by judicial authorities mentioned in the Code and there is therefore no question of miscarriage of justice being caused by not quashing of the complaint and order.