Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points regarding the distinction between recall and review, the circumstances for passing a recall order, and the specific facts of the case:

• Legal Distinction between Recall and Review The Supreme Court clarified that an application for recall is maintainable when it seeks a procedural review rather than a substantive review. Consequently, Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (which bars substantive review after an order is passed) does not apply to such recall applications. (!)

• Circumstances for Passing a Recall Order An order can be recalled if it was passed in the absence of a party (ex parte) based on false information or material facts that were concealed. In this instance, the High Court correctly recalled an ex parte judgment because the respondent demonstrated that the order was based on false information regarding a compromise deed, which the petitioner had actually disputed. (!)

• Precedent Cited The Court relied on the principle established in Budhia Swain and Others v. Gopinath Deb and Others regarding the difference between recall and review and the specific circumstances under which a recall order is justified. (!)

• Case Facts: The Compromise Deed Dispute The petitioner had previously relied on an alleged compromise deed dated 18.04.2016 before the High Court in CRR NO. 3100/2015, which was dismissed. The Supreme Court noted that the petitioner concealed the fact that the respondent had disputed and denied this deed in the current petition for special leave to appeal. (!)

• History of Non-Compliance and Previous Dismissals Prior to the ex parte order, the appellant failed to comply with directions to surrender before the trial court on dates 07.12.2015 and 14.01.2016. The High Court had previously rejected the appellant's prayer for exemption from surrendering, leading to the dismissal of multiple appeals and applications for condonation of delay under the Limitation Act, 1963. (!)

• Procedural History of the Ex Parte Order The petitioner filed Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 6576 of 2017 under Section 482 CrPC, contending a compromise existed. This petition was allowed ex parte on 13.10.2017. The respondent subsequently filed an application for recall, asserting the order was based on false information, which the High Court granted on 23.10.2021. (!)

• Final Ruling on the Appeal The Supreme Court dismissed the petition seeking special leave to appeal, upheld the High Court's decision to recall the order, and directed that the interim order passed by the Supreme Court would no longer operate. (!)