Back
2019 Supreme(Raj) 562
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J.
Smt. Vimlesh Jangid W/o Shri Bhagwan Jangid – Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan, through P.P. – Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1583 of 2019
Decided On : 07-03-2019
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Harsh Sharma.
For the Respondent: Mr. S.S. Mahla.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 482 – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 376 and 450 – Rape – Whether Committed – Application that Court had wrongly recorded date of occurrence – Impugned Order – Challenged – Held, Complainant submitted that even in absence of inherent power, a typographical mistake or error of mis-description could always be corrected, as rightly held by trial Court – No Court is powerless in making a minor correction to advance interest of justice and to prevent miscarriage of justice – Trial Court was justified in allowing correction – Petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. (Para 10, 19 and 21)
Facts of the Case:
Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to assail the order dated 12th February, 2019 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate
Findings of the Case:
Complainant submitted that even in absence of inherent power, a typographical mistake or error of mis-description could always be corrected, as rightly held by trial Court – No Court is powerless in making a minor correction to advance interest of justice and to prevent miscarriage of justice – Trial Court was justified in allowing correction.
Result: Petition being devoid of merits is dismissed.
What is the propriety of correcting a typographical or clerical error in a criminal complaint or record under inherent powers of the court?
What are the limits and authorities for correcting dates or cheque numbers in complaints under Section 152 CPC, Section 200 Cr.P.C., and related statutes in NI Act cases?
What is the ruling on whether a subordinate court can amend or correct clerical errors to advance the cause of justice without constituting an amendment to the complaint?
ORDER :
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to assail the order dated 12th February, 2019 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1, (South), Kota.
2. Petitioner lodged FIR No. 195/2017 for offences under Sections 376 and 450 IPC.
3. The Investigating Agency in the above said FIR on 31st March, 2017 submitted a final report in negative form.
4. Aggrieved against the same, petitioner filed a protest petition and her statement was recorded as a preliminary evidence under Section 200 Cr.P.C. The statement of the petitioner recorded by the Court below is annexed as Annexure-2. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner in her statement Annexure-2 appearing as PW-1 stated that occurrence took place on 08.03.2007. Counsel contends that in fact occurrence took place on 08.03.2017. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to oversight and inadvertence the Court had wrongly recorded the date of occurrence as 08.03.2007 instead of 08.03.2017. Counsel for the petitioner contends that an application was filed before the trial Court for correction of the date. The petitioner earlier approached this Court by filing S.B .Criminal Misc. (Petition) No. 758/2019 and this Court had passed the following order:-
“Counsel for the petitioner has contended that preliminary evidence of the complainant was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. as PW-1. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the opening line of the statement of the petitioner, wrongly date of occurrence was typed as 08.03.2007.
Counsel for the petitioner has contended that for correction of the date, petitioner filed application (Annx.3) and the said application was not entertained by the Presiding Officer. In support of averment made, no affidavit has been filed.
Be that as it may, let petitioner at first instance approach Session Judge, Kota, by presenting application (Annx.3) in case, petitioner do so within one week from today, the Session Judge, Kota, shall mark the application to the concerned court for decision on merits.
In view of above, the present petition stands disposed of.”
5. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in consonance with above order petitioner presented the application before the Court below. The said application has been dismissed by the trial Court by observing that Court is not having any powers to make correction in the record.
6. This Court in Prem Bihari Gupta vs. Surendra Kumar Bardiya, Criminal Misc. (Petition) No. 2915/2017, dated 10.01.2019 had passed the following orders:-
“Petitioner, his father and wife had issued cheques in favour of complainant-respondent. Five separate complaints were filed. During typing of complaints, typographical error occurred regarding number and date of cheques.
Admittedly, cheques have been issued from the cheque book of the petitioner. The trial court rejected the prayer of the complainant-respondent by holding that if correction is permitted, same will tantamount to amendment in the complaint. Aggrieved against the same, complainant-respondent filed a revision petition. The revisional court accepted the revision of the complainant-respondent and permitted the complainant to make necessary corrections.
Admittedly, in the present case typographical error has been corrected. Complainant- respondent has not been permitted to amend the complaint substantially.
To re-enforce the settled legal position that the complaint cannot be amended but typographical error can be corrected by the trial court, I while as a Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court relying upon the judgment of Rajasthan High Court in Bhim Singh vs. Kan Sineh, 2004 (2) Crl. Court Cases 2323 made a reference to Larger Bench.
A Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Avtar Singh vs. Avtar Singh Sidhu, Cr. Misc. No. 45946-M of 2004 and other connected cases being Cr. Misc. Nos. 29443/04, 22104/07, 16400 to 16402 of 2011, 16723/11 and 17502/2011 decided on 4.7.2011 considered case law and thereafter hel
