Supreme Court clarifies Article 226 cannot quash charge-sheet after cognizance; remedy lies under Section 528 BNSS for quashing FIRs, charge-sheets, and cognizance orders.
Case in NewsArticle 226 Cannot Quash Chargesheet After Cognizance, Supreme Court clarifies remedy lies under Section 528 BNSS . |
Discover powerful Latin Maxims and simplify complex legal terms in seconds.
Case Overview
Case Name: Prajnya Pranjal Kulkarni vs. State Of Maharashtra & Anr
In Prajnya Pranjal Kulkarni Versus State Of Maharashtra & Anr., a Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra held that once a Magistrate has taken cognizance, a charge-sheet or FIR cannot be quashed through Article 226 jurisdiction . Instead, the appropriate remedy is under Section 528 BNSS (akin to Section 482 CrPC) . The ruling came while setting aside a Bombay High Court order which wrongly dismissed a writ petition as infructuous after a charge-sheet was filed .
Step into the world of justice with Courtroom Chronicles.
Key Aspects
The Supreme Court examined facts and legal errors made by the High Court . Major issues included :
- The writ petition was filed under Article 226 along with Section 528 BNSS .
- The High Court dismissed it as infructuous once the charge-sheet was filed .
- Petitioners sought quashing of FIR, charge-sheet and cognizance order .
- The High Court misunderstood the precedent in Neeta Singh v. State of UP (2024) .
Legal Insights
The Court clarified the applicable legal provisions in this matter :
- Article 226, Constitution of India – power of High Courts to issue writs; not applicable once cognizance is taken .
- Section 528 BNSS – provides inherent power of High Court to quash FIRs, charge-sheets and even cognizance orders .
- Neeta Singh Case – held judicial orders not amenable under Article 226, but distinguished in present case .
- High Court roster benches have jurisdiction to decide such petitions under both provisions .
Court’s Verdict
The Supreme Court restored the writ petition and held that the Bombay High Court misapplied Neeta Singh . It directed that the matter be heard afresh under Section 528 BNSS keeping the petitioner’s grievance alive regarding quashing of FIR and charge-sheet .
Source – Supreme Court of India
Read also-
The LawGist ensures exam success with quality notes—TPL, Current Affairs, Recent Judgments, and more. Backed by trusted resources and videos, The LawGist is every aspirant’s first choice. Discover more at thelawgist.org.
