Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Quash Petition and Alternative Remedies - Generally, courts recognize that when an effective alternative remedy (such as revision under Section 397 CrPC) exists, a writ petition under Article 226 or 482 CrPC should not be entertained, unless the remedy is found to be inadequate or ineffective. For instance, it is noted that the High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition in view of the Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is available ["Amaravathi Exports Pvt Ltd vs The Commercial Tax Officer - Madras"]. Similarly, courts have emphasized that availability of alternative remedy of criminal revision under Section 397 CrPC, by itself, cannot be a good ground to dismiss an application under Section 482 CrPC ["Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595"].
When is Quash Petition Allowed? - The courts sometimes entertain quash petitions if the alternative remedy is not efficacious or if the remedy has already been exhausted or barred. For example, if the period for appeal has expired and the remedy has not been availed, courts may admit the petition, as in once the petition has been admitted and is pending adjudication... the parties cannot be directed to avail alternative remedy ["SITA RAM VS BANK OF INDIA - Himachal Pradesh"]. Additionally, courts have held that in cases where the petition was entertained and pleadings exchanged, dismissal on the ground of alternative remedy may be unjustified ["Dhani Ram VS Chief Engineer Raj Ghat Project Betwa River Board, Nandanpura, Jhansi and Others - Allahabad"].
Conversion of Proceedings and Jurisdiction - Courts have also recognized that proceedings under different sections (such as Section 482 or Article 227) can be converted or are permissible for substantive justice, even when an alternative remedy exists. For example, the High Court can always convert a petition under Section 482 CrPC to a revision under Section 397 CrPC and vice versa ["Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595"].
Specific Exceptions and Limitations - The Supreme Court and High Courts have clarified that mere availability of an alternative remedy does not bar the entertainability of a writ if the remedy is not efficacious, or if the petition involves jurisdictional issues or miscarriage of justice. As per one decision: the question is whether the writ petition can be entertained even though alternative efficacious remedy is available ["GUJARAT ELECRICITY BOARD VS M. P. SINHA OR SUCCESSOR REGIONAL P. F. COMMISSIONER - Gujarat"].
Summary and Conclusion - The dominant principle across the sources is that quash petitions are generally not entertained when an efficacious alternative remedy, such as revision under Section 397 CrPC, is available. However, courts may entertain such petitions if the remedy is ineffective, barred, or has been exhausted, or if the petition involves jurisdictional or constitutional issues. The courts also recognize that proceedings can be converted between different remedies for the sake of justice ["Amaravathi Exports Pvt Ltd vs The Commercial Tax Officer - Madras"].
References:- ["VED PRAKASH GOYAL vs THE STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD AND ANR - Bombay"]- ["Amaravathi Exports Pvt Ltd vs The Commercial Tax Officer - Madras"]- ["Dhani Ram VS Chief Engineer Raj Ghat Project Betwa River Board, Nandanpura, Jhansi and Others - Allahabad"]- ["DHANI RAM VS CHIEF ENGINEER RAJ GHAT PROJECT BETWA RIVER BOARD, NANDANPURA, JHANSI - Allahabad"]- ["SITA RAM VS BANK OF INDIA - Himachal Pradesh"]- ["Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595"]- ["VISUBHA UMEDSINH JADEJA VS STATE OF GUJARAT - Gujarat"]- ["GUJARAT ELECRICITY BOARD VS M. P. SINHA OR SUCCESSOR REGIONAL P. F. COMMISSIONER - Gujarat"]- ["Aswini Transports (P) Ltd. , Pollachi VS Pollachi Roadways (P) Ltd. - Madras"]- ["Afzal Banu VS State of Telangana - Telangana"]- ["SANJAY vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME, LKO. AND OTHERS - Allahabad"]- ["SANJAY vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME, LKO. AND OTHERS - Allahabad"]- ["STATE TH.C.B.I. vs OM PRAKASH AND ORS. - Jammu and Kashmir"]- ["STATE TH.C.B.I. vs JHABAR SINGH AND ORS. - Jammu and Kashmir"]- ["STATE TH.C.B.I. vs SHEETAL GUPTA AND ORS. - Jammu and Kashmir"]- ["STATE TH.C.B.I. vs PAYAL AGARWAL AND ORS. - Jammu and Kashmir"]- ["S. Rathinasamy VS The Judicial Magistrate, Erode - Madras"]
In the realm of criminal law in India, accused individuals often face a dilemma: when criminal proceedings seem unjust, can they directly approach the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to quash them, or must they first exhaust the alternative remedy of criminal revision under Section 397 CrPC? This question—quash petition can be entertained when alternative remedy under criminal revision—arises frequently in cases involving potential abuse of process or extraordinary circumstances.
The short answer is yes, it generally can, but only in exceptional situations. This blog post delves into the legal nuances, key judicial precedents, exceptions, and practical guidance, drawing from established case law. Note: This is general information based on precedents and not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
A petition for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC can be entertained even when an alternative remedy of criminal revision is available, provided the High Court exercises its inherent jurisdiction in exceptional circumstances such as abuse of process, lack of jurisdiction, or other extraordinary situations. Merely having an alternative remedy does not automatically bar the High Court from exercising its inherent powers to do justice in suitable cases Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595Bhagwan Sahay VS State of Rajasthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 1153.
This principle underscores the residuary nature of Section 482 powers, which exist to secure the ends of justice and prevent miscarriage Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595.
High Courts possess inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC, independent of statutory remedies. These powers aim to secure justice and prevent court process abuse Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595. Courts clarify that an alternative remedy like revision or appeal does not per se prohibit entertaining a Section 482 petition, especially in abuse of process or extraordinary cases Prabhu Chawla VS State of Rajasthan - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 686.
This aligns with broader jurisprudence on alternative remedies. For instance, in writ petitions under Article 226, courts often dismiss on grounds of available alternatives but make exceptions for jurisdictional errors or void actions. As noted, existence of alternative remedy is required to be taken into consideration... Generally, when there is an alternative efficacious remedy available, petition under Article 226... may not be entertained. However, there may be cases wherein the action of the authority is without jurisdiction and it appears to be ab initio void MAHEZBIN MOHAMMAD ARIF KURESHI VS STATE OF GUJARAT - 2021 Supreme(Guj) 634. This mirrors the discretionary approach in Section 482 matters.
Similarly, the question of entertaining a writ petition, despite availability of alternative remedy, is matter of policy/discretion and is not of a compulsion Shantimal Bhandari VS State of M. P. - 2013 Supreme(MP) 654, reinforcing that courts retain flexibility akin to CrPC inherent powers.
Key Supreme Court rulings affirm this. In Dhariwal Tobacco Products Ltd. v. State of MaharashtraAkanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595, the Court explained that the High Court's inherent power is exercised ex debito justitiae for real justice, intervening in abuse or miscarriage even with revision available. It emphasized: the availability of a revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. is not a good ground to dismiss a Section 482 petition and that inherent powers can be exercised to do justice Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595.
In Mohit alias Sonu v. State of Uttar PradeshPrabhu Chawla VS State of Rajasthan - 2016 0 Supreme(SC) 686, the Court held the High Court can entertain Section 482 despite revision when proceedings are mala fide or abusive.
Another judgment notes: the High Court can entertain a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition despite the availability of revision, especially in cases of abuse of process or extraordinary situations, and that this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution Bhagwan Sahay VS State of Rajasthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 1153.
Supporting precedents from writ contexts show consistency. For example, where statutory authority acts outside provisions, writs are entertained despite alternatives: one of the exceptions... is 'where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment' Kwality Agro Products, rep. by its Proprietor K. Srinivasa Rao VS Canara Bank, rep. by its Branch Manager/Authorized Officer - 2018 Supreme(AP) 675. In a SARFAESI case, the court entertained a writ as petitioners made out an exception despite tribunal remedy Kwality Agro Products, rep. by its Proprietor K. Srinivasa Rao VS Canara Bank, rep. by its Branch Manager/Authorized Officer - 2018 Supreme(AP) 675.
While preferable to exhaust remedies, courts recognize exceptions:
Limitations are clear: powers exercised sparingly, not to bypass statutes routinely Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595. In contrast, some cases dismiss outright if no exception: The writ petition is therefore dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA) LTD. VS STATE OF U. P. - 2018 Supreme(All) 568.
Courts caution: Writ petition should not ordinarily be entertained when there is equally efficacious alternative remedy available Surana Industries Ltd. & Another VS Good Earth Maritime Ltd. & Others - 2005 Supreme(Mad) 1442, but discretion prevails in injustice cases.
In practice, courts prefer exhausting revision under Section 397 first, but won't strictly bar Section 482 in special cases. Key advice:
For petitioners, highlight exceptions early. Defendants may argue alternatives to resist quashing.
This discretionary balance prevents rigid bars while curbing forum shopping, as seen in cases like habeas corpus dismissed for alternatives but with liberty to pursue them SANJAY vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOME, LKO. AND OTHERS.
In summary, a quash petition under Section 482 CrPC may be entertained despite criminal revision availability, but only in exceptional circumstances warranting inherent intervention Akanksha Arora VS Tanay Maben - 2025 1 Supreme 595Bhagwan Sahay VS State of Rajasthan - 2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 1153. This ensures justice without undermining statutory paths.
Key Takeaways:- Alternative remedy is discretionary, not absolute bar.- Invoke for abuse, mala fide, or jurisdictional flaws.- Exercise sparingly; prefer exhausting revision.
Always seek professional advice tailored to facts. Stay informed on evolving precedents for effective legal strategy.
#CrPC482, #QuashPetition, #LegalRemedies
be revision ... alternative
case, normally the High Court should not interfere if there is an adequate efficacious alternative remedy. ... The High Court ought not to have entertained the writ petition in view Constitution if an effective alternative remedy is 12.When an effective alternative remedy is available, a writ p style="position:absolute;white-space:pre;margin:0;padding:0;top:556pt
, petition is not to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. ... inexpedient to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy. ... The argument is that once petition is entertained and respondents are called upon to file response do not prohibit the court not to dismiss the same on the ground of alternative remedy. ... Dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of #HL_S....
be inexpedient to dismiss the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy. ... The argument is that once petition is entertained and respondents are called upon to file response do not prohibit the Court not to dismiss the same on the ground of alternative remedy. ... Dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of alternative remedy long after its filing and exchange of pleadings, may lead to shutting the do....
But according to the learned Counsel, in the present case the time for appeal had already run out and, therefore, the alternative remedy having not been availed of, this petition could not be entertained. ... This petition was entertained and admitted on 22.12.2004. Once the petition has been admitted and is pending adjudication before this Court since 22nd December, 2004, the parties cannot be directed to avail alternative remedy w....
Availability of alternative remedy of criminal revision under Section 397 CrPC, by itself, cannot be a good ground to dismiss an application under Section 482 CrPC. 10. ... The said petition has been dismissed by the High Court by the order impugned on the ground that it is not maintainable as the appellantwife has a remedy of a revision under Section 397 CrPC. 7. ... In view of the above, we dispose of the appeal by setting aside the impugned order of the High Cour....
Learned counsel for the petitioner then urged that if the writ petition has been entertained and the counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents to which a rejoinder-affidavit has been filed, the writ petition should not at this stage be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. ... The writ petition is therefore dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy. The interim order dated 19.5.2016 is discharged. ... Learned c....
In view of the above, the present Habeas Corpus Writ Petition is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy with liberty to the petitioner to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law, if so ... Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned order dated 06.03.2023 contained as annexure no.1 in the writ petition. II. ... . - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 2182 of ....
, but then litigant ought to have proceeded to avail alternative remedy, which is not under Section 482 of the Code, but under 228 or any other remedy. ... In view of the above, the word used in the order dated 13.07.2023 is ‘to avail appropriate remedy’ and hence, this Court is of the considered view that alternative remedy may be construed proceeding other than successive quashing petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. ... illegalities or when some miscarriage o....
The Supreme Court has therefore not laid down any absolute rule of law that in every case where there is alternative remedy, writ petition can be entertained ignoring existence of alternative remedy. ... The question is whether the writ petition can be entertained even though alternative efficacious remedy is available to the petitioner. Shri S. B. Vakil has drawn my attention to the prayers contained in the writ #....
7. It is well settled that existence of alternative remedy is required to be taken into consideration by the Court while entertaining petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Generally, when there is an alternative efficacious remedy available, petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may not be entertained. However, there may be cases wherein the action of the authority is without jurisdiction and it appears to be ab initio void, in such cases, the High Court under Article 226 can exercise powers of granting appropriate relief and there is no....
It is held that where the challenge is on the ground that the order is ultra vires, the question of exhausting alternative remedy could hardly arise. The petition can be entertained under the amended Article 226(3) if alternative remedy is not sufficiently efficacious. There is no reason to disagree with the proposition laid down in this case but considering the factual aspect as regards to the contract of guarantee, wherein breach of conditions are alleged, which require to lead evidence. Moreover, the civil court is the alternative remedy sufficiently efficacious.
The judgment deals with exceptions as to when a writ petition can be entertained, if there is an alternative remedy. In this case, the 1st respondent did not comply with proviso to Rule 8(1) of the rules. One of the exceptions mentioned in the said judgment is “where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the enactment”.
The respondents have not chosen to file reply in this matter. The question of entertaining a writ petition, despite availability of alternative remedy, is matter of policy/discretion and is not of a compulsion. In given facts and situation, Court may relegate the litigant to avail alternative remedy, whereas in different factual scenario may also entertained it. This is settled in law that despite availability of alternative remedy, the petition can be entertained.
Consequently, the impugned order calls for no interference. It is no doubt correct that alternative remedy is not an bar to a writ petition but it is equally true that writ is a discretionary remedy. Writ petition should not ordinarily be entertained when there is equally efficacious alternative remedy available. Since, in this case such a remedy was available by filing a civil suit, we dismiss the writ petition itself.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
