RAGHUNATH SHARMA & ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

Citation: [2025] 5 S.C.R. 2128 · Decided: 16-05-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: PANKAJ MITHAL · Disposal: Case Allowed
cites 13 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 5 S.C.R. 2128 : 2025 INSC 723
Raghunath Sharma & Ors. 
v. 
State of Haryana & Anr.
(Criminal Appeal No(s). 2656-2657 of 2025)
16 May 2025
[Pankaj Mithal and Sanjay Karol,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Correctness and legality of the impugned judgment whereby the 
High Court restored FIR previously quashed, recalling the order 
of quashment.
Headnotes†
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.362, 482 – Power 
under  – Scope – Criminal cases were quashed u/s.482 
on the ground of compromise entered into between the 
parties – However, the complainant, filed an application 
for revival of the FIRs – High Court ordered revival of the  
FIRs – Impermissibility:
Held: 1.1 s.362 provides that a Court shall not, once it has signed 
the judgment or final order disposing of a case, alter or review 
the same, except to correct an error clerical or arithmetic – Bar 
u/s.362 is almost absolute – The only exceptions to the bar, which 
would then permit the invocation of inherent powers, would be if it 
is necessary to meet the ends of justice; or to remedy the abuse 
of the process of law – In such extraordinary circumstances, the 
Court should record reasons for exercising such power, justifying 
the invocation thereof. [Paras 8, 14]
1.2 Once a judgment has been passed, the powers u/s.482 do 
not permit its alteration or review – Such power is meant solely to 
secure the ends of justice and it cannot be taken to mean doing 
something that is expressly prohibited by statute – The role of 
the Court, after a judgment has been delivered, is circumscribed 
by the law itself – In the present facts, the only provision of 
law, that permits an alteration in the judgment, in its own terms, 
was not resorted to – What was done was a review of the 
* Author
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 
2129
Raghunath Sharma & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr.
judgment quashing the proceedings which was not permissible.  
[Paras 10, 11]
1.3 Impugned judgment was passed by the High Court without any 
authority or basis – Once the criminal cases had been quashed, 
u/s.482 on the ground of compromise entered into between the 
parties, one of the parties violating terms thereof is a ground entirely 
foreign to law, to once again invoke such powers and recall the 
order of quashing – Impugned judgment and the consequences 
flowing from such revival, set aside and quashed. [Paras 12, 13]
Words and Phrases – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – 
ss.362, 482 – “Save as otherwise provided by this Code” in 
s.362, if permits alterations u/s.482. [Paras 9.3, 9.3.4]
Case Law Cited
State of Karnataka v. M. Devendrappa [2002] 1 SCR 275 : (2002) 3 
SCC 89; Sanjeev Kapoor v. Chandana Kapoor [2020] 1 SCR 663 : 
(2020) 13 SCC 172; Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa 
[2000] Supp. 4 SCR 313 : (2001) 1 SCC 169; Sankatha Singh v. 
State of U.P. [1962] Supp. 2 SCR 817 : 1962 SCC OnLine SC 
165; Sooraj Devi v. Pyare Lal [1981] 2 SCR 485 : (1981) 1 SCC 
500; State of Punjab v. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar [2011] 15 SCR 
540 : (2011) 14 SCC 770; State of M.P. v. Man Singh [2019] 13 
SCR 570 : (2019) 10 SCC 161; Narayan Prasad v. State of Bihar 
(2019) 14 SCC 726 – relied on.
State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy [1977] 3 SCR 113 : (1977) 
2 SCC 699; Sunder Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu [2009] 3 SCR 
326 : (2009) 14 SCC 244; Vineet Kumar v. State of U.P. [2017] 6 
SCR 922 : (2017) 13 SCC 369; Ahmad Ali Quraishi & Anr. v. State 
of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. [2020] 1 SCR 170 : (2020) 13 SCC 435; 
Simrikhia v. Dolley Mukherjee [1990] 1 SCR 788 : (1990) 2 SCC 
437; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab [2012] 8 SCR 753 : (2012) 
10 SCC 303; Telangana Housing Board v. Azamunnisa Begum 
[2018] 4 SCR 797 : (2018) 7 SCC 346; New India Assurance 
Co. Ltd. v. Krishna Kumar Pandey (2021) 14 SCC 683; State of 
Kerala v. M.M. Manikantan Nair [2001] 3 SCR 203 : (2001) 4 SCC 
752 – referred to.
List of Acts
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
2130
[2025] 5 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
List of Keywords
Section 362, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 482, Code 
of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Order of quashing recalled; Revival 
of FIRs ordered; Quashed FIR restored; Order of quashment 
recalled; Review of judgment quashing the proceedings; Criminal 
cases quashed; Compromise; Alteration or review of judgment; 
Judgment; Violations of term of compromise.
Case Arising From
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No(s). 
2656-2657 of 2025
From the Judgment and Order dated 08.10.2018 and 29.04.2019 
of the High Cou
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.