that a criminal court after delivering judgment, is functus officio, properly so called, and, except for the statutorily permitted jurisdiction to correct clerical or arithmetical error, looses seisen of the case. There are some exceptions like that of an order passed without hearing a party, where the power to recall, has been judicially recognized, but that all in no manner clothe a criminal court with authority to issue further directions in a decided cause. In case, some orders are required to implement a violated direction in a judgment passed by a criminal court, or some orders are required to give effect to it, the person aggrieved, may invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., that amongst others, invests this Courts with jurisdiction “to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code”. In the aforesaid premise, it would be an option, and, lawfully so, for the party claiming violation of the directions of the Additional Sessions Judge made in his order dated 03.08.2017 passed in Criminal Revision no.2 of 2017 by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, to have approached this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking appropriate directions to give effect to the said order; the order dated 03.08.2017 being after all an order passed under the Code. The enforceability on merits, of course, would have to be established. But, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who was approached by the second opposite party, was certainly not the forum to apply for enforcement, or to give effect to his order dated 03.08.2017, once he had decided the Criminal Revision and parted with matter. If at all, the learned Additional Sessions Judge felt on a perusal of the application filed before him, labeled as a contempt application, that indeed contempt was committed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate by an act of willful disobedience to his order, he could refer the matter to this Court, under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, or other appropriate provisions of the said Act. Thus, in no jurisdiction of his, the learned Additional Sessions Judge could proceed to pass the orders impugned for enforcement of his order dated 03.08.2017.
