To prevent frivolous or vexatious criminal cases from proceeding, the High Courts are endowed with the inherent power under the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash an FIR or criminal proceedings. This power is a crucial tool to prevent the abuse of the court’s process.
In Pradeep Kumar Kesarwani v. State of UP, the Supreme Court, noting that this power was not always being used effectively, laid down a clear four-step process for High Courts to consider when hearing quashing petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).
The Four-Step Analytical Framework
The High Court must consider the following four questions:
- Step One: Is the material relied upon by the accused of sound, reasonable, and indubitable quality, or is it of a “sterling and impeccable” nature ( such as public records, undisputed official documents, etc)?
- Step Two: Does this material, on its face, rule out the charges levelled against the accused? That is, is it sufficient to persuade a reasonable person to dismiss the accusations as unfounded?
- Step Three: Has this material been refuted by the prosecution or the complainant? And, is the material of such a nature that it cannot be credibly refuted?
- Step Four: Would proceeding with the trial, in light of this material, amount to an abuse of the court’s process and fail to serve the ends of justice?
The Consequence of the Test
The Supreme Court directed that if the answer to all four questions is in the affirmative, this should persuade the High Court to quash the criminal proceedings in the exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the CrPC.
Usefulness of this Four Test Process
This process aims to do justice to an accused who is wrongfully implicated and to save precious judicial time that would otherwise be wasted on a trial unlikely to result in a conviction.
