“5. Taking the preliminary objection raised by the learned Dy. Govt. Advocate first. Suffice it to say that there is no bar whatsoever regarding the invoking of inherent jurisdiction of this Court. It is true that inherent power of the Court has to be exercised sparingly and only for securing the ends of justice, but on this premise it cannot be said that merely because the petitioners have a right to raise objection and plead at the time of framing of the charge that there is no sufficient material for framing of any charge against them. They should be debarred from approaching this Court. At an earlier opportunity of time when the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offence and summoned them to appear in the Court. I am of the view that under the circumstances when there appears absolutely nothing on record against the accused, there would be no justification in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue as, obviously, this approach by itself would tantamount to an abuse of the process of the Court, an certainly under these circumstances the power u/s 482 CrPC can be exercised. My view is fortified by the view taken by Hon’ble the Apex Court in Ashok Chaturvedi and others v. Shitul H. Chanchani and another reported in 1998 Supreme Court cases (Criminal) 1704. Thus, I am afraid, I do not agree with the preliminary objection raised by the learned Dy. Govt. Advocate.”
