Section 482 CrPC in BNSS: Section 528 Quashing of FIR

Section 482 of the CrPC (saving of inherent powers of the High Court) is now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), from 1 July 2024. The wording is the same, so a High Court can still quash an FIR, complaint or criminal proceeding to prevent abuse of the process of court or to secure the ends of justice. All the case law under Section 482, including Bhajan Lal, continues to apply.

What Section 528 BNSS says

The section is a single sentence. It opens with “Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court” and then names three purposes for which those powers may be used. It does not create a new power. It only recognises that a High Court, as a superior court, has always had inherent authority to do real justice where the written procedure is silent or is being misused.

In practice the section is used mostly for quashing. Typical petitions ask the High Court to quash an FIR, a charge-sheet, a summoning order, or the entire criminal case. It is also used to set aside orders that cause injustice where no other remedy exists, and to give effect to compromises in suitable cases.

What changed from Section 482 CrPC

Nothing of substance. The only textual change is that “this Code” has become “this Sanhita”. The section numbering changed because the BNSS reorganised the chapters. Petitions filed on or after 1 July 2024 are filed under Section 528 BNSS; petitions pending on that date continue under Section 482 CrPC because of the saving clause in Section 531 BNSS.

Students should note one trap: Section 482 still exists in the BNSS, but it now deals with anticipatory bail (old Section 438 CrPC).

Important case law

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992)

Decided on 21 November 1990 and reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, this is the leading case on quashing. The Supreme Court gave seven illustrative categories where an FIR or proceeding may be quashed:

1. The allegations, even if taken at face value and accepted in full, do not make out any offence.
2. The allegations and materials do not disclose a cognizable offence justifying police investigation without a Magistrate’s order.
3. The uncontroverted allegations and the evidence collected do not disclose any offence.
4. The allegations make out only a non-cognizable offence, and the police investigated without a Magistrate’s order.
5. The allegations are so absurd or inherently improbable that no prudent person could find sufficient ground to proceed.
6. There is an express legal bar against starting or continuing the proceedings, or the statute gives a specific remedy.
7. The proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fides or was instituted maliciously to wreak vengeance.

The Court added a caution that the power must be exercised sparingly and with circumspection. The list is illustrative, not exhaustive.

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012)

A three-judge bench held that the High Court can quash even non-compoundable offences on the basis of a genuine settlement where the dispute is essentially private, such as commercial, matrimonial or family disputes. Serious offences such as murder, rape and dacoity, and offences affecting society at large, are not to be quashed on compromise.

Common confusions

• Section 528 vs Article 226: Quashing can be sought under either. Many High Courts hear FIR-quashing under Section 528 BNSS, while challenges involving fundamental rights or public law issues may go under Article 226. The tests applied are largely the same.
• Section 528 vs revision: Where the BNSS gives a specific remedy (appeal or revision), the High Court generally expects that remedy to be used first. Inherent power fills gaps; it does not replace express provisions.
• Sessions Court: No court other than the High Court has inherent power under this section.

Practical guide for the public

A petition under Section 528 is filed before the High Court that has territorial jurisdiction over the police station or court where the case is pending. Common situations are a false FIR arising from a civil or money dispute, a matrimonial case after settlement, or a summoning order passed without any material.

Documents generally needed: certified or true copy of the FIR, charge-sheet or complaint, the impugned order (such as the summoning order), any settlement deed and affidavits of both parties (for compromise cases), documents that show the case is civil or malicious, and an affidavit supporting the petition. In compromise cases, the High Court often requires the parties to appear or file affidavits so it can confirm the settlement is voluntary.

Filing a quashing petition does not by itself stop the investigation or trial. Interim protection depends on a specific order of the High Court.

Exam angle

• Section 482 CrPC = Section 528 BNSS. Section 482 BNSS = anticipatory bail.
• Only the High Court has this power; the three purposes are frequently asked word by word.
• Bhajan Lal: seven categories; decided in 1990, reported in 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.
• Gian Singh (2012): quashing on compromise is possible for private disputes, not for heinous or society-wide offences.

Frequently asked questions

What is the new section for 482 CrPC under BNSS?

Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 now contains the High Court’s inherent powers, with the same wording as Section 482 CrPC.

Can an FIR be quashed under Section 528 BNSS?

Yes. The High Court can quash an FIR if the case falls within principles like those in Bhajan Lal, such as no offence being disclosed or the case being malicious.

Can a criminal case be quashed after compromise?

Yes, for disputes that are essentially private, as held in Gian Singh (2012). Heinous offences and offences against society are not quashed merely because the parties have settled.

Is there a time limit for filing a Section 528 petition?

No limitation period is fixed by the statute, but long unexplained delay can lead the High Court to refuse relief.

Can the Sessions Court quash an FIR?

No. Inherent power under Section 528 BNSS belongs only to the High Court.

Quick quiz

Sources

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Sections 528 and 531
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 482
• State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335
• Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Supreme Court, 2012

This page is for education and general information, not legal advice for a specific case.