Santosh Kumar Vishwakarma vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 April, 2023
I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The date of incident was
31.5.1995 at that time, the age of the appellant was between 16-17 years as per
medical evidence as observed by the trial Court in Para 51 of its judgment.
From the perusal of the judgment under review, it appears that contention
regarding age of the appellant was not raised at the time of hearing of the
appeal, hence it cannot be raised at this stage in review petition. This Court
dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant after meticulously appreciating the
evidence available on record, hence, I do not find any ground to recall/review
the judgment dated 12.5.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.
2387 of 1997. Even otherwise, this Court has no power to alter its own
judgment in exercise of powers under S. 482 Cr.P.C. in view of the bar created
by Section 362 Cr.P.C. [See. Moti Lal Vs. State of M.P. - AIR 1994 SC
1544; Mohd. Yaseen Vs. State of U.P. (2007) 3 (Cri) 297, Kirti Prakash
Vs. State of U.P. - 2004 CrLJ 3522, Perumal P.S.L. Vs. K. Baliah 2004
CrLJ 3240 (3241) (Mad), Mool Chand Vs. State of M.P. - 2008 (2)
MPLJ 426 (MP)]
In view of the aforesaid, this review petition is hereby dismissed.