Introduction
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), and its new incarnation as Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), is a power that the High Courts have been vested with in order to ensure that there are no abuses of the court’s processes, or miscarriage of justice. A very important recent development is the SC laying down an elaborate 4-point test for courts to test the veracity of plea for quashing of criminal proceedings under these provisions in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of UP, 2025.
Background
The argument among the judges with regards to the ambit and limitation of quashing powers under section 482/528 revolves around the delicate balance between the rights of the accused and the interest of maintaining justice. In the Bhajan Lal case, the Supreme Court focused on some illustrative categories in which quashing can be found justified, and false or absurd accusations were one of such categories. However, the need to create a defined and gradual process to prevent the abuse of this intrinsic power gave rise to more developments in the law itself.
In 2025, the Supreme Court again went back to the law on quashing the criminal proceedings in an appeal from the order of the Allahabad High Court that declined the entitlement to interfere with the summons issued as against the accused in an old complaint case having allegations for sexual offences.
Key Points
The Supreme Court set forth a new four-factor test based on a variety of established legal doctrines:
- Sterling Quality Material: Firstly, courts are required to find if the material placed by the accused is of sterling quality, i.e., such material would be sound, reasonable, and of sterling quality, evidence should be beyond any suspicion, and reliable material as could be the basis for abashment.
- Overruling the factual allegations: Second, such evidence, if believed, would be enough to completely rebut the factual underpinning of the complaint or information, convincing a reasonable person that further criminal proceedings would be futile.
- Non-rebuttal by Prosecution: Another requirement is that the evidence already adduced by the accused has not been refuted by the complainant/prosecution or cannot rationally be refuted and there is no real issue to be tried.
- Abuse of Court Process: Finally, a trial under such a situation would most definitely result in an abuse of the process of the court or is likely to prevent the due course of justice.
The Court made it clear that fulfilment of all these criteria is a must. Not until all four tests are satisfied, will the High Court exercise its inherent power to quash, and thereby an end to be spared to the expenditure of judicial time upon cases which are on the face of it hopeless.
Recent Developments
The Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani judgement represents a clear move towards structured judicial logic in quashing of cases and refines the earlier “category-based” strategies developed in Bhajan Lal and other cases. The lower courts’ strict approach to mechanically reject quashing even in case of delays and lack of any credible evidence was not appreciated by the Supreme Court since it created huge doubt about the good faith of the prosecution. The new provision has specifically been made applicable to proceedings under Section 482 CrPC and Section 528 BNSS, as Indian criminal procedure shifts.
It was further held that when cognizance has already been taken by a magistrate, then Article 226 writ petition jurisdiction is not allowed for quashing the same and the proper remedy is under Section 528 BNSS.
Conclusion
The new 4-point test laid down by the Supreme Court when it comes to quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS, provides much required clarity and uniformity in the exercise of inherent judicial powers. The framework is designed to ensure substantive, principled consideration along dimensions of trustworthy evidence, factual overruling, no-refutability and the avoidance of Court abuse, while balancing expeditious justice for the accused and the integrity of the criminal process. This incremental process has the potential to make a huge mark in the world of criminal jurisprudence.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY Stuti Vineet
