Criminal Law 📅 2026-07-16⏱️ 9 min read

Section 528 BNSS Quashing of FIR — Replacing Section 482 CrPC in 2024

Complete guide to Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 — the new provision for quashing FIRs and criminal proceedings. Learn how Section 528 BNSS replaces Section 482 CrPC, the grounds for quashing in Calcutta High Court, procedure, and key case laws.

📑 Table of Contents

Section 482 CrPC to Section 528 BNSS — The Transition

With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, which came into force on July 1, 2024, the familiar Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been renumbered as Section 528 BNSS. This is not a cosmetic change — while the core inherent power of the High Court remains intact, the BNSS introduces certain procedural refinements and timelines.

Section 482 CrPC was, for five decades, the most frequently invoked provision for quashing FIRs and criminal proceedings. It empowered High Courts across India to pass orders necessary to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of court. Generations of lawyers and judges have built a rich body of jurisprudence around Section 482, with thousands of Supreme Court decisions defining its scope and limits.

The transition to Section 528 BNSS does not erase this jurisprudence. The Supreme Court, in matters pending before it, has clarified that the change from CrPC to BNSS does not affect the substantive principles governing quashing. The existing case law under Section 482 CrPC continues to apply with full force to Section 528 BNSS, subject to any specific changes introduced by the BNSS.

Advocate Panchanand Shaw, practicing from 14 Hare Street, Kolkata — 700001 with 5+ years of experience at the Calcutta High Court, handles quashing petitions under Section 528 BNSS. Call +91 90070 00603 for consultation.

What Is Section 528 BNSS — Inherent Powers of High Court

Section 528 BNSS provides:

'Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.'

This provision serves three purposes:

1. To Give Effect to Orders Under BNSS: The High Court can pass orders to ensure that its own orders and orders of subordinate courts are implemented effectively. For example, if a bailable warrant has been issued and the police are not executing it, the High Court can direct the police to execute the warrant.

2. To Prevent Abuse of the Process of Court: This is the most commonly invoked ground. An FIR or criminal proceeding that is mala fide, frivolous, vexatious, or filed with an ulterior motive (e.g., to harass, to settle personal scores, to extract money) can be quashed. Similarly, proceedings that are barred by law (e.g., double jeopardy, limitation, lack of sanction) can be quashed.

3. To Secure the Ends of Justice: This is the residual category that gives the High Court the flexibility to intervene in any situation where the continuation of proceedings would result in injustice. It covers cases where the allegations, even if taken at face value, do not constitute an offence; where there is an express legal bar to the proceedings; and where the dispute is essentially civil in nature but has been given the color of a criminal offence.

The Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) laid down the authoritative guidelines for the exercise of inherent powers. These guidelines are considered the 'Magna Carta' of quashing jurisprudence.

Grounds for Quashing FIR Under Section 528 BNSS

Based on the Supreme Court's guidelines in Bhajan Lal's case and subsequent decisions, the following are the recognized grounds for quashing an FIR or criminal proceeding under Section 528 BNSS:

1. Allegations do not constitute an offence: Even if the allegations in the FIR/complaint are taken at face value and accepted in their entirety, they do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused.

2. Express legal bar: There is an express legal bar to the institution or continuation of the proceedings — e.g., lack of sanction under Section 197 CrPC/BNSS, limitation under Section 468 CrPC/BNSS, double jeopardy under Article 20(2) of the Constitution.

3. Allegations are absurd or inherently improbable: The allegations are so absurd and inherently improbable that no prudent person can ever reach a conclusion that there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused.

4. Mala fide and vexatious proceedings: The criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused.

5. Civil dispute given color of criminal offence: The dispute is essentially of a civil nature (e.g., breach of contract, property dispute) but has been given the color and shape of a criminal offence to pressurize the accused.

6. Settlement between parties: Where the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the court is satisfied that no public purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution. This applies mainly to offences of a personal/private nature and not to heinous crimes.

Grounds on which quashing is NOT permitted: The High Court will not quash on the basis of disputed facts (which require trial), on a mini-trial of evidence, on the accused's version of events (unless supported by unimpeachable evidence), or on the ground that the accused has a good defense on merits (defenses should be raised at trial).

Procedure to File a Quashing Petition in Calcutta High Court

The procedure for filing a quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS before the Calcutta High Court is as follows:

Step 1 — Gather All Relevant Documents: Collect: (a) a copy of the FIR, (b) the chargesheet (if filed), (c) all orders passed in the case, (d) any documents that support the grounds for quashing (e.g., settlement agreement, marriage certificate, divorce decree, sale deed, bank statements).

Step 2 — Draft the Petition: The petition must: (a) set out the facts of the FIR and the criminal proceedings, (b) state the specific grounds on which quashing is sought (citing the relevant Bhajan Lal categories), (c) explain how the FIR is an abuse of process, and (d) contain a prayer for quashing and interim stay of proceedings.

Step 3 — File the Petition: File the petition before the Calcutta High Court (Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction or under Section 528 BNSS read with Article 227). The petition must be accompanied by an affidavit and the prescribed court fee. The filing is done at the Criminal Section of the High Court.

Step 4 — Mention for Interim Stay: If urgency is pleaded, the advocate mentions the matter before the concerned bench for interim stay of proceedings in the trial court. The court may grant an interim stay ex-parte (without hearing the other side) if satisfied that a prima facie case for quashing is made out. The stay prevents the trial court from proceeding until the quashing petition is decided.

Step 5 — Notice to State and Complainant: The court issues notice to the State (through the Public Prosecutor) and the complainant/victim. They file their responses/affidavits.

Step 6 — Final Hearing: Both sides argue. The High Court examines the FIR and the material on record to determine whether the Bhajan Lal guidelines are satisfied. No evidence is recorded — the hearing is based on documents.

Step 7 — Judgment: The High Court either quashes the FIR/proceedings or dismisses the petition. If quashed, the criminal proceedings come to an end. If dismissed, the trial resumes.

For drafting and filing a quashing petition at the Calcutta High Court, contact Advocate Panchanand Shaw at +91 90070 00603. With 5+ years of experience, Advocate Shaw has successfully obtained quashing of numerous FIRs. Chamber: 14 Hare Street, Kolkata — 700001.

Landmark Supreme Court Guidelines on Quashing

The law on quashing FIRs has been developed through decades of Supreme Court jurisprudence. The following are the most important cases:

1. State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992 Supp (1) SCC 335): The foundational case. The Supreme Court laid down seven categories of cases in which the High Court can exercise its inherent power to quash. These categories are exhaustive, not illustrative — meaning the High Court cannot invent new grounds for quashing beyond these categories.

2. B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675: The Supreme Court held that the High Court can quash criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes where the parties have settled their differences and have started living together, even if the offences are non-compoundable. The court emphasized that the ends of justice may require quashing to promote harmony.

3. Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303: A larger bench of the Supreme Court clarified the principles governing quashing on the basis of settlement. The court held that in matrimonial, commercial, and civil disputes, quashing on the basis of settlement should be the norm. In serious offences (murder, rape, dacoity, etc.), quashing on the basis of settlement should be the exception.

4. Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641: The Supreme Court summarized the principles governing quashing of criminal proceedings based on settlement. It emphasized that economic offences, offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, and offences having a serious impact on society cannot be quashed on the basis of settlement.

These judgments continue to guide the Calcutta High Court in deciding quashing petitions under Section 528 BNSS. Knowledge of these precedents is essential for drafting effective quashing petitions.

For strategic advice on whether your FIR qualifies for quashing, contact Advocate Panchanand Shaw at +91 90070 00603. With 5+ years of experience, Advocate Shaw can assess the merits and guide you through the process.