Site navigation

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 saves the inherent powers of the High Court…

In Mary Angel v. State of Tamil Nadu (1999), the Supreme Court held that the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius (express mention of one thing implies the exclusion…

Choose your answer

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 saves the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under the Sanhita, prevent abuse of the process of any Court, or secure the ends of justice. Following the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Mary Angel v. State of Tamil Nadu (1999), why does the express provision for costs in specific sections of the criminal procedure statute not bar the High Court from awarding exemplary costs under its inherent powers?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer D

In Mary Angel v. State of Tamil Nadu (1999), the Supreme Court held that the maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius (express mention of one thing implies the exclusion of another) is merely an aid to construction and has only limited operation in relation to the High Court's inherent powers under criminal procedure (now Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023; formerly Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973). Therefore, specific provisions for costs elsewhere in the Sanhita do not curtail the High Court's inherent power to impose exemplary costs to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice.

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic