The power of the High Court to prevent abuse of criminal process is not exercised merely by issuing general directions to the police. Where a petition specifically seeks quashing of an FIR or criminal proceedings, the Court must consider the substance of the challenge in accordance with the governing law.
In Md. Mashood & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Ors., reported as 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 264 and 2026 INSC 259, the Supreme Court set aside a High Court order that had disposed of the matter without deciding the quashing challenge on its merits. The Court referred to the approach laid down in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., decided on 2 September 2025.
The 2025 decision identified four considerations for examining a prayer for quashing based on material relied upon by the accused: whether the material is sound and indubitable; whether it rules out the factual assertions in the complaint; whether the material has not been or cannot reasonably be refuted by the prosecution or complainant; and whether continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court.
For proceedings under the present criminal-procedure framework, Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is the provision corresponding to the High Court's inherent power; older cases may continue to involve Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure depending on the applicable transitional and substantive context.
A petition seeking quashing should therefore identify the precise legal basis for interference and place the relevant material before the High Court. The existence of an FIR alone does not determine the result; the Court examines the allegations, the available material, the applicable offence provisions and whether continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of process.
With Regards,
S. JEEVAGAN, M.A., LL.M.
Advocate & Legal Consultant
M/s. JEEVAGAN LAW ASSOCIATES, MADURAI.