GHAN SHYAM PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) J. C. Gupta, J. Parties counsel are present and since the relevant material has already been placed on record by the par ties with the affidavits, it is not necessary to summon the lower courts record.

(2.) THIS application in revision is directed against the order dated 5-9-98 passed by IIIrd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sultanpur in S. T No. 85/90 under Sections 302/396/323/149/147/148, IPC, State v. Krishna Mohan and others, whereby the learned Sessions Judge al lowed the application moved on behalf of opposite party No. 2 for recalling PW1 for further cross-examination. The order ap pears to have been passed by the learned Session Judge in exercise of powers under Section311, Cr. P. C.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the argu ment of the learned Counsel for the ap plicant, it is necessary to have a glance on the provisions of Section 362, Cr. P. C. which runs as follows: "362. Court not to alter judgment.- as otherwise provided by this 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 arithmetical error. "