Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4060
PATNA HIGH COURT
RAJESH KUMAR VERMA, J
Raushan Kumar Son of Sanjay Yadav R/o vill - Jirwa, ward no. 2, P.S. - Shankarpur, Distt. - Madhepura – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85202 of 2025 | CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5042 of 2023
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra
For the Respondents: Dr. Indiwar Kumari
No court can alter a signed judgment except to correct clerical errors as per Section 362 of Cr.P.C.
Headnote:The Court analyzed the conditions under which bail was granted to the petitioners, citing Section 362 of the Cr.P.C. regarding alteration of judgments. The case concerned a modification application following the granting of bail on specific conditions about court attendance and prior criminal history disclosure. The Court concluded that the modification petition was dismissed due to failure in revealing prior criminal cases. The application for modification was denied.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. modification petition dismissed. (Para 5) |
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate For the State : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
2 22-12-2025 Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Dr. Indiwar Kumari, learned APP for the State.
2. The present modification application has been filed for modify the order dated 29.04.2025 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 5042 of 2023.
3. By the order dated 29.04.2025, the petitioner was granted bail with the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to communication gap on the basis of the information furnished by the Pairvikar, it was stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the petitioners have no criminal history but in fact the petitioners carry one more case other than the present one.
The Court also noticed Section 362 of Cr.
P.C./Section 403 of BNSS, which reads as follows :-
“362/403- Court not to alter judgment. Save as otherwise provided by this Code/Sanhita 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 except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.”
5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant modification petition is dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
