The court reaffirmed that inherent powers cannot be used to review final orders, as this would contravene the explicit provisions of the CrPC.

ORDER

1. This order will govern disposal of both these petitions since it is submitted that both the petitions involve common issue and prayer in the identical fact situation.

2. Both these petitions have been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer:

'It is therefore most respectfully prayed your Lordships that S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition may kindly be accepted and allowed and impugned FIR bearing No.476/14 dt 5.12.2014 registered at PS Sadar, Jaipur South U/S 419 IPC may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside upto the extent of the accused / petitioners.

And pass any other order / orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.'

3. At the outset it is observed that with regard to the same prayer, the petitioners filed S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1438/2017 for quashing of the impugned FIR No.476/2014 before this Court with the similar prayer which is reproduced as under:

'It is therefore respectfully prayer your lordships that the criminal misc. petition may kindly be accepted and allowed and the impugned FIR bearing No.476/2014 dated 5/12/2014 registered at Police Station Sadar, Jaipur South offence under section 419 of I.P.C. may kindly be ordered to be quashed and set aside up to the extent of the accused - petitioners.

Any other order or relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.'

4. The aforesaid petition was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2017 by observing thus:

'As per the prosecution story, posts of Constables were advertised. Petitioners applied for the post of Constables. However, some other persons appeared on behalf of the petitioners in the written examination. Case is still under investigation.

Keeping in view the nature of allegations levelled against the petitioners, no ground to scuttle the criminal proceedings at the very threshold is made out.

Dismissed.'

5. Counsel for the petitioners submits that under the similar circumstances two FIRs were registered against the petitioners at Delhi i.e. FIR No.969/2014 and 539/2014 registered with Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi for the offences under Section 419, 468 and 471 IPC. Counsel submits that High Court of Delhi has quashed FIR No.969/2019 registered with Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi vide its order dated 02.03.2017 while deciding Criminal Misc. Case No.1218/2015. Counsel submits that this fact was not within the knowledge of the petitioners. Hence, it could not be brought into the notice of this Court at the time of disposal of earlier S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1438/2017. Counsel further submits that subsequently the High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No.539/2014 registered with Police Station Sarai Rohilla, Delhi vide order dated 03.08.2018. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, the petitioners have approached again this Court by way of filing this successive petition for quashing of FIR No.476/2014. Counsel submitted that under the changed circumstances, the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. be exercised and the impugned FIR be also quashed.

6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioners.

7. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.

8. Without going into the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that as per the provisions contained under Section 362 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot alter the order dated 08.08.2017 passed by this Court while deciding S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No.1438/2017. For ready reference the provisions contained under Section 362 Cr.P.C. are quoted here as under:

'362. Court not to after judgment. Save as otherwise provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same exc