In Quashing Petition, Wider Challenge Is Available Than Discharge Petition : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reiterated that an accused can still file a petition to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) even after filing a charge sheet. It rejected the argument that the accused must wait for charges to be framed and then challenge an order framing charges through a revision application.

The Court explained that in a quashing petition, wider grounds of challenge would be available than in a discharge petition.

The bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice AG Masih heard the criminal appeal filed by the accused against the Allahabad High Court's order dismissing the quashing petition declaring it as 'infructuous' after a charge sheet was filed against the accused.

Opposing the appellant's appeal before the Supreme Court, the counsel representing the Respondent-State of Uttar Pradesh contended that once the charge sheet was filed against him, the accused could have waited until the framing of charges to challenge the order of framing charges through a revision application.

Rejecting the Respondent's argument, the Court expressed shock to their argument.

“Learned counsel representing the State of Uttar Pradesh submits that the High Court order does not call for interference as the appellants have an efficacious remedy to challenge the order framing charge by filing a revision application. We are shocked to note the approach adopted by the State Government. What is suggested by the State Government is that once charge-sheet is filed, accused cannot do anything except to wait till the charge is framed and thereafter, can file a revision application to challenge the order of framing charge.”, the court said.

The Court noted that although the appellant-accused could file a discharge application, it was observed that the scope of application for discharge is completely different from the scope of a petition for quashing the criminal proceedings.

The Court reasoned that “while arguing a case for discharge, the appellants will not be in a position to rely upon any document which is not the part of charge sheet. The ground of abuse of process of law will not be available while arguing discharge application. However, in a petition for quashing either under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a wider challenge is available including a challenge on the ground of abuse of process of law.”

The Court added that the accused would have benefitted from a quashing petition because he can rely upon the documents which are not part of the charge sheet.

“In such proceedings, the accused can rely upon documents which are not the part of the charge-sheet. Therefore, we reject the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the State. Though the submissions made on behalf of the State have no basis, we have dealt with the same elaborately to ensure that the same are not urged in a similar case.”, the court said.

Because the High Court didn't hear the appellant's quashing petition on merits, therefore the court set aside the impugned order and restored the case to the High Court's file which was directed to be listed on Jan. 6, 2025.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.

Case Title: MUKESH & ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 960

Click here to read/download the order

Appearances:

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Raghvendra Upadhyay, Adv. Mrs. Purnima Jain, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Tripathi, Adv. Mr. Awadhesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Chandra Kishore Yadav, Adv. Mr. Kisalaya Shukla, AOR

For Respondent(s) Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR Ms. Preeti Goel, Adv. Mr. Abhinav Rathi, Adv. Ms. Apurva Singh, Adv.

Related Report: For Discharge Application, Only Documents Forming Part Of Chargesheet Can Be Considered : Supreme Court