GURDEEP SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 27/9/2023, it was brought to my notice that in the order dtd. 4/8/2023 passed by me in S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No. 767/2022 (Gurdeep Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan), after the words "HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT" appearing in the header of judgment, "Bikaner" has been mentioned instead of "JODHPUR" by the Junior Personal Assistant concerned.

(2.) Today, the matter has been ordered to be listed in the category of "To Be Mentioned".

(3.) After summoning the original record of aforesaid case and perusing the order dtd. 4/8/2023, I directed my Private Secretary to seek explanation from the concerned Junior Personal Assistant. Upon serving the notice seeking explanation, the Junior Personal Assistant gave the explanation that by the order dtd. 4/8/2023, the Hon'ble Court allowed the criminal misc. petition and while quashing and setting aside the order passed by the learned Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act Cases), Bikaner, ordered to release the confiscated vehicle on "Supurdagi". It was submitted that such type of orders to release the vehicle on "Supurdagi" were also passed by the Court on earlier occasions as well and for her convenience, the Junior Personal Assistant copied the contents of some earlier order and pasted it in the order passed on 4/8/2023 and wherever necessary corrections/amendments were required to be made, she corrected/ amended the same, but inadvertently, in order to change the word "Jodhpur" as already mentioned in the pasted order, she opted for command find and replace all, resulting into change of word from "Jodhpur" to "Bikaner" in all places of the order dtd. 4/8/2023. Due to such command, the header of the judgment "HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR" got changed to "HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT Bikaner" and the same could not be noticed by her.