How Senior Advocates File Section 528 BNSS Quashing Petitions | EduLaw
EduLaw EditorialAdvocate PlaybookA practical guide to drafting and arguing quashing petitions under Section 528 BNSS — Bhajan Lal categories, the September 2025 four-step test, sterling material, interim relief and the limits of inherent jurisdiction.
EduLaw India’s Legal Intelligence Platform Home / Blog / Advocate Playbook Advocate Playbook 068 How Senior Advocates File Section 528 BNSS Quashing Petitions Inherent jurisdiction is not a memo of facts — it is a jurisdictional plea tied to Bhajan Lal architecture and the September 2025 four-step test. Criminal Practice • Inherent Jurisdiction • Quashing • Updated August 2026 8 Minute Read Most quashing petitions fail before the first hearing, on the drafting table. The junior receives the brief, reads the FIR, and writes twenty-two paragraphs explaining why the complainant is lying: the money was actually repaid, the witnesses are relatives, the allegations are exaggerated. It reads like a written statement in a civil suit. When it is listed, the Bench asks a single question — “These are all matters for trial, are they not?” — and the petition is over. Senior counsel start from a different premise. A petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 does not ask the High Court to decide who is telling the truth. It asks the Court to hold that, even accepting the accusation as it stands, allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of process. That is a jurisdictional proposition, not a factual one, and it must be pleaded, structured and argued as such. Everything in this playbook follows from that distinction. The Real Objective You are not proving innocence. You are demonstrating that no legally sustainable prosecution exists on the material available — and that the continuation of the proceeding would serve process rather than justice. Illustrative Example A private complaint alleging cheating is filed in 2026 in respect of a business transaction that concluded in 2021. The parties executed a written settlement in 2022, and the complainant signed a no-dues acknowledgement recording that nothing further was payable. No explanation is offered for the four-year delay in approaching the Magistrate. The Magistrate examines the complainant and issues summons. The accused approaches the High Court under Section 528 BNSS. This scenario is entirely fictional. It is used only to demonstrate technique and is not a real case, reported judgment or summary of any decided matter. A word on the governing framework before we begin. For proceedings under the new criminal laws, the inherent power is preserved by Section 528 of the BNSS , worded in substantially the same terms as Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Matters pending immediately before the BNSS came into force may continue to be governed by the old Code under the repeal-and-savings provision in Section 531 of the BNSS. Check the date of institution on your file, cite the provision that actually applies, and never mix the two numbering systems in one memo of parties. 1. Diagnose the Ground Before You Draft a Word Before drafting, decide which single defect you are asking the Court to act upon. Broadly, quashing grounds fall into a few families: the allegations, accepted at face value, do not disclose the ingredients of the offence charged; the dispute is civil or contractual in substance and has been given a criminal colour; the prosecution is barred by law or by a prior order; the proceeding is manifestly mala fide, instituted to wreak vengeance; or there is a fundamental procedural illegality in the cognizance or summoning order. A petition that pleads all five is a petition that pleads none. Choose the strongest, plead it as the primary ground, and let the rest sit as supporting circumstances. In the illustrative example, the primary ground is that the complaint, on its own showing and read with the unimpeached settlement, discloses a concluded civil transaction rather than the ingredients of cheating. The four-year delay and the absence of any explanation are supporting circumstances that colour the motive; they are not the case itself. 2. Choose the Right Provision and the Right Stage Inherent jurisdiction is not the only door, and it is not always the correct one. Where the challenge is to the registration of an FIR itself on constitutional grounds, Article 226 may be invoked, often in combination with Section 528. Where the grievance is a defect in the summoning order, the appropriate relief may be setting aside that order rather than quashing the entire complaint. Where the real complaint is that a Magistrate directed investigation without following the requirements now built into Section 175(3) of the BNSS, that is a discrete challenge with its own contours. Senior’s Preparation Note Stage of Proceeding What the Petition Must Show FIR registered, investigation ongoing That the allegations disclose no offence at all, or that the registration is manifestly mala fide; investigation is otherwise a statutory function Police report filed under Section 193 BNSS That the collected material, taken as a whole, cannot sustain the ingredients alleged