BANWARI LAL Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three applications for revision have been referred to us because they raise an important question of law as to which the learned referring Judge was in some doubt. Applications for the revision of the orders passed by the lower Court had been already disposed of by him. They were applications made from jail, but although he had not had the advantage of hearing counsel on behalf of the applicant, he had considered the applications on the merits and had dismissed them. On fresh application being filed, through counsel the question was raised of whether he had jurisdiction to review his own orders, and he ordered notice to be issued, and after hearing counsel passed the order-under which the cases have been referred to us.

(2.) Section 369. Criminal P.C., as it now stands, is as follows: Saveas otherwise provided by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force or in the case of a High Court established by Royal Charter, by the Letters Patent of such High Court, no Court when it has signed such judgment shall alter or review the same, except to correct a clerical error.

(3.) But Mr. Johri in dealing with this. Section has pointed out that although, the general rule is against him, he may, be saved by the expression "save as otherwise provided by this Code," for in Section 561 of the Code it has been enacted that nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent power of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuses of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.