Recorded court concessions bind parties unless corrected promptly in the same court; later contradiction was rejected.

A statement recorded by a court as having been made in open proceedings forms part of the judicial record and cannot later be contradicted by affidavit or other evidence. If a party believes the record is inaccurate, the proper course is to seek correction from the same court while the matter is still fresh. In the absence of such correction, the recorded concession remains binding in later proceedings. Applying that principle, the appellants could not dispute before the Supreme Court that a concession had been made before the High Court, and interference with the conviction and sentence was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants could dispute before the Supreme Court the concession recorded by the High Court and seek interference with the conviction and sentence.

Analysis: The recorded statement of what transpired in court forms part of the judicial record and cannot be contradicted later by affidavit or other evidence. If a party believes that the record is inaccurate, the proper course is to approach the same court for correction while the matter is still fresh. In the absence of such a step, the recorded concession binds the party and cannot be ignored in subsequent proceedings.

Conclusion: The appellants were not entitled to contend before the Supreme Court that no concession was made before the High Court; interference was declined.

---