Back
FARJAND ALI
Dilip Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Farjand Ali, J. - The matter comes upon an application for correction/modification in the order dated 13.12.2022 passed in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.727/2022.
2. It is submitted that a mistake has been committed in the petition filed by the petitioner wherein instead of actual vehicle No.RJ-09-GA-3683 the same has wrongly been mentioned as RJ-19-GA-3683, therefore, the order dated 13.12.2022 has been passed in this regard. It is further submitted the said mistake occurred due to inadvertence and is a clerical error, therefore, the rectification is sought.
Heard.
3. Considering the submissions, the error seems to be committed due to inadvertence thus, a lenient view is taken. The application for modification/correction in the order dated 13.12.022 passed in S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.727/2022 is allowed and it is ordered that in the said order Vehicle No. RJ-09-GA-3683 be read instead of RJ-19-GA-3683.
This order shall also be treated as part and parcel of order dated 13.12.2022.
Courts may allow correction/modification in orders to rectify inadvertent clerical errors.
Courts have the authority to modify/correct orders to rectify typographical errors.
The court has the discretion to allow modification to correct typographical errors in orders.
The court established that typographical errors in legal documents can be corrected to ensure the accuracy of court records.
Clerical errors in court orders must be corrected to maintain the accuracy and integrity of judicial records.
The court emphasized the necessity for accuracy in judicial orders to prevent irreparable loss due to clerical errors.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
