Suresh T. Kilachand vs Sampat Shripat Lambate And Another on 24 October, 1991
5. The judgment dated 26-4-1991 is an oral judgment which has not been appealed against. It is a final order passed by this Court and it is not permissible for such an order to be either amended or reviewed. Though the present application has been presented in the form of an application for extension of time, in actual substance it is an application for review of that order because what is sought is an amendment to the final judgment in question whereby the applicant desires that the time-limit prescribed by Sugla, J. should be modified and, furthermore, that the all important clause whereby the accused was to stand acquitted should be set aside. I have had an occasion to consider the legal position in detail in the case of Shri Suresh T. Kilachand v. Sampat Shripat Lambate (Criminal Application No. 2123 of 1991 in Criminal Appeal No. 398 of 1980). I have had occasion to examine the legal position thredbare and in the course of that judgment, I have taken the view that it is not permissible for this Court, in view of the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to either review, or alter or modify a final judgment. The same principle applies to a situation where an application for the recall of a final judgment is made. Having regard to the position in law, I have pointed out to the learned A.P.P. that regardless of what the merits of the case may be that the judgment dated 26-4-1991, which has now become final, cannot be modified in the least.