Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.27 seconds)Section 369 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 424 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Pampapathy vs State Of Mysore on 28 July, 1966
The Supreme Court, in Pampapathy's case. , did not hold that this Court under Section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, does not possess an inherent power to alter its judgment pronounced in a criminal case in order to secure the ends of justice.
Raj Narain And Ors. vs The State on 29 October, 1958
32. Not a single ruling has been cited by Sri. Asthana which shows that the decision of the Full Bench in Raj Narain's. case , has either been overruled by a larger Bench of this Court or by the Supreme Court. Sitting singly I am bound by the Full Bench decision in Raj Narain's case and it must, therefore, be held that this Court has the inherent power to review its previous judgment in order to secure the ends of justice, I am fortified in my view by a decision of a learned single Judge of this Court in Raj Karan v. State 1966 All. W. R. (HC) 534 in which it was held as follows:
Section 440 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Thungabhadra Industries Ltd vs The Government Of Andhra Pradesh on 22 October, 1963
28. Sri. Asthana next placed reliance on the following observations made by the Supreme Court in Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Govt. of A.P. :
Sangam Lal vs Rent Control And Eviction Officer And ... on 1 October, 1965
There is thus, in my opinion, no conflict between the Full Bench in Sangam Lal's case , and the Full Bench in Raj Narain's case .
Surendra Singh And Others vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 16 November, 1953
23. The facts of the instant case are entirely different and I see no relevancy of the decision of the Supreme Court in Surendra Singh's case , to the facts of the instant case.