The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the CrPC can only be exercised in exceptional circumstances when there is no other way to seek a remedy.

1. This matter is relating to the maintainability of the petitioner.

.2. The petitioner herein was the complainant in Crime No.705 of 1993 before the Judicial Magistrate, Thirumangalam, for the offences under Sections 447, 448 and 323, Indian Penal Code. The occurrence took place in 11-10-1993 and the First Information report also was lodged on the same day. However, the Thirumangalam Town Police, who initiated the proceedings before the Judicial Magistrate, Thirumangalam, did not file the charge sheet for more than an year and therefore, the accused therein filed Crl.M.P.No.2864 of 1994 on 20-10-1994 under Section 167(5) and 468(2), Code of Criminal Procedure to stop the further proceedings and discharge them. The learned Judicial Magistrate allowed the petition discharging the accused persons. Aggrieved of that order, the complainant, who is the petitioner herein, has come forward to this Court and has filed the petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate.

3. The Registry entertained a doubt as to the maintainability of this petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure for the reason that Section 397(1), Code of Criminal Procedure provides the procedure to agitate against the illegal order passed by a subordinate courts, and therefore returned the petition. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner had represented the petition with an enforcement which reads that the petition is maintainable in view of the decision reported in 1984 Crl. LJ 576, that further the complainant had failed to file the revision in time and therefore, the only remedy open to the victim is to invoke the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure. As the registry is not satisfied with this endorsement made by the learned counsel, the matter is placed before the open court for consideration.

.4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr.Selvam submitted that even though under Section 167(5), Code of Criminal Procedure, a specific period is mentioned for filing the charge sheet for the summons cases within a period of six months or else to stop the further proceedings, that in this case, the averments of the complaint is very specific for the offence under Section 506 (ii), Indian Penal Code also and therefore the time for filing the charge sheet is not restricted to one year as misconceived by the learned Judicial Magistrate, that as the learned Judicial Magistrate has passed the illegal order when he has no Jurisdiction to pass the order under Section Section 468(2), Code of Criminal Procedure the same can be questioned under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure. In other words, according to the learned counsel, when the Court had no jurisdiction to pass an order but has pass on order under the assumption of power, the same can be questioned under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the order. The learned counsel cited a decision of this Court in Inspector of Police, Central Crime Branch v Deepam & another, 1991 LW (Crl.) 568 which according to him, to having similar facts and the order was questioned invoking the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure.

5. But in that case relied upon by the learned counsel, the maintainability of that petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure was not considered by the Court and no ratio was laid for the application of Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure. It a true that in that case also, the further proceedings was stopped for the reason that he charge was not filed within the specified time and that order was questioned in this court by filing a petition under Section, 482, Code of Criminal Procedure. But, somehow, the Registry did not raise any question as to the maintainability of the petition was taken in file. During the stage of enquiry also, the maintainability of the petition under Section 482, Code of