MARY ANGEL AND ORS. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

MARY ANGEL AND ORS. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

The Supreme Court held that the High Court, while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, has the power to pass orders including imposition of exemplary costs in appropriate cases to prevent abuse of the process of court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, unless inconsistent with any provision of the Code. This is not fettered or controlled by other provisions in the Code and the maxim 'expressio unius est exclusio alterius' does not restrict such power.

Parties
Appellants: Mary Angel and Ors.; Respondent: State of Tamil Nadu; Informant/complainant: Josephine Jaya
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Inherent Powers of High Court, Imposition of Costs, Section 482 Cr PC, Abuse of Process, Exemplary Costs
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Inherent Powers of High Court Imposition of Costs Section 482 Cr PC Abuse of Process Exemplary Costs

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Angel and Ors.

Appellants

State of Tamil Nadu

Respondent

Josephine Jaya

Informant/complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court has jurisdiction to impose exemplary costs under Section 482 CrPC in criminal cases
  2. 2 Whether inherent powers of High Court are limited by specific statutory provisions for costs

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the High Court, while exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code, has the power to pass orders including imposition of exemplary costs in appropriate cases to prevent abuse of the process of court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, unless inconsistent with any provision of the Code. This is not fettered or controlled by other provisions in the Code and the maxim 'expressio unius est exclusio alterius' does not restrict such power.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • Imposition of costs of Rs. 10,000 each on appellants upheld; to be paid to informant (complainant), wife of accused no. 1.