Michael Zothankhuma, J.

Heard Mr. J.C. Lalnunsanga, learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. A.K. Rokhum, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram.

2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned Judgment & Order dated 12.12.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Lunglei in Criminal Trial No. 562/2013, arising out of Saiha PS Case No. 135/2013 under Section 302 IPC, wherein the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, 30 days.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 11.10.2013 @11:30pm, one Tluangtincheuva S/o Hrinhniara (L) of Khawmawi Village submitted a written report to the O/C Lawngtlai P.S to the effect that his wife Dawthahleiiangi @Pumpumi 36 years was murdered by his domestic servant Thawngchungbik of Halkha Myanmar on 11.10.2013@ 9:30 pm at their residence Khawmawi village by using a knife. Hence O.C. Lawngtlai registered a Lawngtlai PS Case No. Zero u/s 302 IPC r/w section 6 @PP (EII) Rule, 1950 dated 11.10.2013, which was duly investigated into. After conducting preliminary investigation O/C Lawngtlai transferred the case to O/C Lunglei for completion of the case, as the place of occurrence fell under Lunglei P.S. jurisdiction. O.C., Lunglei subsequently registered a case vide LLI P.S. C/No. 135/2013 u/s 302 IPC r/w 14 Foreigner Act dated 26.10.2013 and continued the investigation.

4. After completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was filed. The learned Trial Court, thereafter, framed the charge under Section 302 IPC against the appellant on 19.03.2014, where the appellant pleaded not guilty. Thereafter, 12 prosecution witnesses were examined and after examining the appellant under Section 313 Cr.P.C, where the appellant admitted to stabbing the deceased, the learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment.

5. The learned Amicus Curiae has in the first instance stated that though the date of the judgment as reflected in the first page of the impugned judgment and order shows the date as 12.12.2015, the issuance of the said judgment and order vide Memo No. 79/D&SJ/LLI/2015 bears the date 10.12.2015. He also submits that the said judgment was signed by the Session Judge on 11.12.2015. Besides the above, the learned Amicus Curiae submits that the appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment on 10.12.2015. He submits that the learned Trial Court could not have sentenced the appellant for imprisonment on a date prior to the conviction of the appellant.

6. The learned Amicus Curiae submits that in the case of Allauddin Mian & Others Sharif Mian & Another v. State of Bihar reported in (1989) 3 SCC 5, the Apex Court has held that the learned Trial Court after recording the conviction order, should adjourn the matter to a future date, for pronouncing the sentence to be imposed upon the offender.

7. Mr. A.K. Rokhum, learned Public Prosecutor submits that there seems to be typographical errors in the impugned "judgment & order" and the sentencing order. He submits that the mistake is a mere technicality and in that view of the matter, the case may be sent back to the learned Trial Court to re-fix the date for sentence hearing.

8. Mr. J. C. Lalnunsanga, learned Amicus Curiae does not have any objection to the said prayer of the Public Prosecutor.

9. We have heard the counsels for the parties and on perusal of the original record, we find that the submission of the learned Amicus Curiae is correct. The impugned judgment and order has got three dates i.e., 12.12.2015, 11.12.2015 and 10.12.2015. Besides the above, the sentence hearing was held on 10.12.2015 and sentence was also awarded on 10.12.2015. We are also of the view that some typographical error has occurred in the impugned judgment and orders. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate that learned Trial Court should correct the errors. The Trial Court should also be more vigilant in the future so that such errors do not occur in the future.

10. Section 235 Cr