RATAN KUMAR JAIN Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent No. 5-South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. has filed the instant application seeking modification of the order dated 09.08.2005. A learned Division Bench of this Court, after hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties and also after having taken the affidavits filed by the Union of India, into consideration passed the following order:

(2.) THE instant writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution on 03.11.2009 by a learned coordinate Division Bench and thereafter, the same was restored to its file vide order dated 27.09.2010. During pendency of the petition, the respondent No. 5 filed the instant application on 14.03.2012 seeking clarification of the order dated 09.08.2005, on several grounds, stated in the application.

(3.) ON perusal of Rule 40 of the Rules, it appears that the Rules provide for modification, clarification, restoration or review of the order which has finally settled the rights or the lis between the parties has finally been adjudicated upon. It is manifest from the fact as provided in Rule 40 of the Rules, that bail applications under section 438 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Cr.P.C.') has to be listed before the same coram as the applications filed under section 438 and 439 of the Cr.P.C. are finally disposed of. However, applications filed under section 389 of the Cr.P.C. provides for suspension of sentence pending the appeal and releasing of the appellant on bail may not be listed before the same Bench since these applications are interim in nature in pending appeal under provisions of Rule 40 of the Rules.