], a 3-Judge Bench of this Court
elaborately considered the scope and extent of the
power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It was observed
that the power of quashing should be exercised
sparingly, with circumspection and in the rarest of
rare cases, such standard not being confused with
the norm formulated in the context of the death
penalty. It was further observed that while
examining the FIR/complaint, quashing of which is
sought, the Court cannot embark upon an enquiry as
to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1469 of 2019 dt.20-07-2026
allegations made therein, but if the Court thinks fit,
regard being had to the parameters of quashing and
the self-restraint imposed by law, and more
particularly, the parameters laid down by this Court
in R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab (AIR 1960 SC 866)
and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal [(1992) Supp
(1) SCC 335], the Court would have jurisdiction to
quash the FIR/complaint.
