1950 (10) TMI 22 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether it is open to the High Court to review or alter a judgment delivered in open court.
2. Limits of such a review if the court has the power to review.
3. Effect of such review on the decision already arrived at.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether it is open to the High Court to review or alter a judgment delivered in open court:
The primary argument was based on Section 369 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that no court, after signing its judgment, shall alter or review it except to correct a clerical error. Mr. Amin argued that since the judgment had not been signed, it was open to the court to alter or review it. However, the court clarified that Section 369 does not apply to High Court judgments in criminal appellate jurisdiction. Section 424 of the Code makes it clear that the rules in Chapter XXVI, which include Section 369, apply to the judgments of criminal courts of original jurisdiction and appellate courts other than the High Court. Therefore, the High Court does not have the power to alter or review its judgment before it is signed.

2. Limits of such a review if the court has the power to review:
The court held that even if it had the power to review or alter its judgment, such power should be exercised very sparingly. It should only be exercised where there is an error apparent on the face of the record or an obvious mistake about the facts which, if not corrected, would lead to a miscarriage of justice. The court cited cases where judgments were reviewed due to misapprehension of facts or errors apparent on the face of the record, but emphasized that new arguments or defenses should not be grounds for review.

3. Effect of such review on the decision already arrived at:
The court concluded that the judgment delivered on September 13 became final as soon as it was recorded and a writ under the seal of the court was issued. Therefore, it was not open to the court to review or alter it merely because the transcript of the judgment was not submitted until a few days later. The court also noted that if it had the power to review, it would have likely ordered further evidence to be recorded to ascertain whether the directors had knowledge of the deception. However, since the court held that it had no power to review or alter the judgment, the earlier order must stand.

Conclusion:
The High Court does not have the power to alter or review its judgment in criminal appellate jurisdiction after it has been recorded and a writ issued. Even if such power existed, it should be exercised sparingly and only in cases of apparent errors or mistakes. The judgment delivered on September 13, therefore, stands as final.

Certification for Appeal:
The court granted a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court, considering the legal question of whether the High Court has the power to review or alter its judgment after it has been recorded and a writ issued.