B. L. HANSARIA, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS Court, being of the view that grant of bail by the Sessions Judge, Sundargarh, to the opposite party, who was accused of an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was not in accordance with law, took suo motu cognizance of the same by an order passed on 9/11/1992. As it was found that despite service of notice on the opposite party no appearance was made, the order of bail granted by the Sessions Judge, Sundargarh, was set aside on 10/2/1993 being satisfied about the illegality of the order. This case was, thereafter, filed on 16/2/1993 to recall the order of cancellation on the ground that the opposite party had entered appearance on 11/12/1992, but in Vakalatnama, due to inadvertence, the connected case was described as Suo Motu Criminal Revision instead of Suo Motu Criminal Misc. Case. It is because of this that the V akalatnama was not placed in the record of the main case and cancellation order was passed without hearing the opposite party, which should, therefore, be recalled.

( 2 ) THE first point for determination is whether, on the face of what has been stated in section 362, Cr. P. C. , this case is at all