SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 443

Rajendra Prasad Arya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


ORDER :- The accused is the petitioner in the present case and had filed an application for being released on bail while the matter is still pending before the trial Judge. On 21-7-1998, it appears, the Court rejected his prayer for bail. But, unfortunately in the order-sheet of the proceeding it was indicated that the accused has been released on bail and pursuant to that order, in fact, the accused was released on bail.

2. Later on the Court came to know of a wrong order having been incorporated and recalled the earlier order passed on 21-7-1998 and incorporated the correct order, namely, refusing the prayer for bail and directing the trial Judge to bring the petitioner into custody. On 17-5-1999 when the Court recalled the earlier order dated 21-7-1998, admittedly the accused was not heard. The only question for consideration is whether the Court ought to have heard the accused on that date before making necessary corrections in the order-sheet dated 21-7-1998. There is no dispute with the proposition that the Court has always the power to rectify any mistake committed by it. But since the accused has already been released pursuant to an earlier order incorporated in the order-sh



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top