Sashibhusan Tripathy and Another vs State of Orissa

B.K. Behera, J.—I have heard Mr. Mohapatra for the petitioners and Mr. N.C. Panigrahi, the learned Additional Government Advocate.

The order dropping a proceeding u/s 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which is a final order within the meaning of Section 362 of the same Code has been reviewed and the proceeding has been revived illegally on an application made for it. As provided in Section 362 of the Code, save as otherwise, provided by the 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 except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. A clerical of arithmetical error in an order occasioned by an accidental slip or omission of the Court. It represents that which the Court never intended to say. It is an error apparent on the face of the record and does not depend, upon its discovery on argument of disputation. An arithmetical error is a mistake of calculation and a clerical error is a mistake in writing or typing. (See AIR 1965 SC 1047 Smt. Sooraj Devi Vs. Pyare Lal and Another, ). No case can be revived by reviewing the final judgment or order. In this connection, reference may be made to a decision of this Court in 1983 Cuttack Law Reports (Criminal) 185 Ranka Sahu alias Rankanidhi Sahu and Ors. v. Pratap Ch. Das and Ors.

I would allow the revision and quash the impugned order.