LexSTATE OF PUNJAB versus DAVINDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR & ORS. ETC
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2011) 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 540 STATE OF PUNJAB v. DAVINDER PAL SINGH BHULLAR & ORS. ETC (Criminal Appeal Nos.753-55 of 2009) DECEMBER 7, 2011 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: c s.362 - Alteration/Modification of judgment - Permissibility of - Held: There is no power of review with the Criminal Court after judgment has been rendered - High Court can alter or review its judgment before it is signed - When judgment/order is passed, it cannot be reviewed - 0 s.362 is based on an acknowledged principle of law that.once .a matter is finally disposed of by a Court, the said Court in the absence of a specific statutory provision becomes functus officio and is disentit/ed to entertain a fresh prayer for any relief unless the former order of final disposal is set aside by E a Court of competent jurisdiction in a manner prescribed by Jaw - Court becomes functus officio the moment the order for disposing of a case is signed - Such an order cannot be altered except to the extent of correcting a clerical or arithmetical error - There is also no provision for modification F of the judgment. s.482 - Inherent powers under - Scope of exercise - Applications filed uls.482 in a disposed of appeal - High Court entertained the applications, directed investigation by CBI and consequently CBI registered FIR - Held: Prohibition G contained in s.362 is absolute; after the judgment is signed, even the High Court in exercise of its inherent power u/s.482 has no authority or jurisdiction to alter/review the same. Constitution of India, 1950: Article 137 - Power to review H 540 STATE OF PUNJAB v. DAVINDER PAL SINGH 541 BHULLAR & ORS. ETC any judgment- Held: Supreme Court by virtue of Article 137 A has been invested with an express power· to review any judgment in Criminal Law. Jurisdiction: Of the Bench - Held: A Judge or a Bench of Judges can assume jurisdiction in a case pending in the B High Court only if the case is allotted to him or them by the Chief Justice - Strict adherence of this procedure is essential for maintaining judicial discipline and proper functioning of the Court - The Judge cannot choose which matter he should entertain and he cannot entertain a petition in respect of which C jurisdiction has not been assigned to him by the Chief Justice. Investigation/Inquiry: When CBI enquiry can be directed - Held: A constitutional court can direct the CBI to investigate into the case provided the court after examining the a/legations in the complaint reaches a conclusion that the D complainant could make out prima facie case against the accused - However, the person against whom the investigation is sought, is to be impleaded as a party and must be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard - CBI cannot be directed to have a roving inquiry as to whether a E person was involved in the alleged unlawful activities - The court can direct CBI investigation only in exceptional circumstances where the court is of the view that the accusation is against a person who by virtue of his post could influence the investigation and it may prejudice the cause of F the complainant, and it is necessary to do so in order to do complete justice and make the investigation credible. Doctrine of waiver: Bar of waiver/acquiescence - Held: Issue of bias must be raised by party at the earliest if he is G aware of it - If plea of bar is not taken at early stage, bar of waiver is created - Moreover, question of waiver! acquiescence would arise in a case provided the person apprehending the bias/prejudice is a party to the case. Judicial bias: Disability to act as an adjudicator - Held: H 542 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 15 (ADDL.) S.C.R A Suspicion or bias disab.les an official from acting as an adjudicator - Mere ground of appearance of bias and not actual bias is enough to vitiate judgment/order - Judgment which is result of bias or want of impartiality is a nullity. B Judgment/Order: Review/alteration of judgment - Permissibility - Held: There is no power with the criminal court to review after judgment is rendered. Res judicata: Writ of habeas corpus petitions filed earlier and dealt with by the courts in accordance with law - Fresh C petition in respect of the same subject matter filed after 10 years - Maintainability of - Held: A second petition for issuing a writ of habeas corpus is barred by principles of res judicata - T
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.