The concept of inherent powers under section 482 as declared in Cr.P.C in the context of the high court finds its essence in the fact that the courts are created for the purpose of doing justice in the case. The courts per se have all powers to take any and every proceeding in order to come to a just decision in the case. The Cr.P.C declares various powers expressly but it is contingent of the fact that it may be not exhaustive about all circumstances.
Moreover circumstances may be dynamic and correspondingly dynamism may be required in the Cr.P.C. Despite making express declarations in the Cr.P.C of the various proceedings the inherent powers of the High Courts have been saved. Section 482 Cr.P.C does not create or confer the inherent powers rather it merely acknowledges or declares the inherent powers of the High Court. The word used is nothing and not notwithstanding, had it been the word notwithstanding then the inherent powers of the High Court would have had an overriding effect or capacity over the express provisions of the Cr.P.C, which would have been in consistent with the very spirit of the Cr.P.C and the idea as well as concept of inherent powers. Therefore, the inherent powers are already with the high court and they are not something which have been created for any special purpose.
The purpose of inherent powers is primarily to do complete justice in the given case. There may be a situation of (Non-Liquet) where the Cr.P.C is silent upon a particular issue, inherent powers of the High Court will come into picture and take care of the particular situation to do complete justice. Perhaps the High Court have to be very careful in exercising this power, because this power is only to be exercised as an exception and no as a rule of law and to be exercised sparingly i.e. with due care and caution to do the real and substantial justice.
Section 482 Cr.P.C provides for the instances where in the inherent powers of the High Court can be exercised. The following are the instances:-
a. Orders Necessary to give effect to any other order i.e. if there was an existing order the High Court can issues further orders to make those orders more effective if there is no express provision given in the law for enforcement of that particular first order in time.
b. To prevent the abuse of the process of any court i.e. quashing of the FIR can be done by the High Court despite no explicit provision were provided in the code for quashing of the FIR if the high court is satisfied that quashing is necessary to prevent the abuse of the process of the court.
c. Otherwise to secure the ends of the justice depending upon the facts and circumstances of the particular case.
Therefore, the inherent powers are not the one which are explicitly provided to the High Court by the legislature, though they were already subsisting with the High Court since the inception to meet the ends of justice.
Kapil Chandna Advocate
(Supreme Court of India)