This order dismisses a modification application seeking to alter bail conditions. Relying on Section 362 CrPC, the court held that judgments cannot be altered except for clerical errors, rejecting the claim of a communication gap regarding criminal history.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15483 of 2023
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40921 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2022 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
CHUNNU SAHNI S/o Govardhan Sahni Resident of Village-Paithaniya, P.S.Chakiya, District-East Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER
2 15-03-2023
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.
Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.
The present modification application has been filed for modify the order dated 04.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. 40921 of 2022.
By the order dated 04.11.2022, the petitioner was granted bail with the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner 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 his absence on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15483 of 2023(2) dt.15-03-2023 2/3
two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner 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 petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
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 petitioner has no criminal history.
The Court also notice Section 362 of Cr. P.C. it reads as follows :-
“362- Court not to alter 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15483 of 2023(2) dt.15-03-2023 3/3
judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.”
In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant
modification petition is dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
mdrashid/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the court can modify bail conditions upon discovery of a communication gap regarding criminal antecedents under Section 362 CrPC?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
CHUNNU SAHNI
THE STATE OF BIHAR
RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
