Recall of final criminal order permitted where affected party was not heard; recall is distinct from review under Section 362 CrPC.

Section 362 CrPC does not require a rigid or overly technical bar against recall where strict application would defeat justice. The Court distinguished recall from review: recall may be used where an affected party was not heard, while review concerns an error apparent on the face of the record. Because the earlier criminal revision order had been passed when the revisionist was absent, the High Court was justified in recalling that order and directing the matter to be listed for fresh hearing. No error was found in the impugned order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in recalling its earlier order and directing the criminal revision to be listed for fresh hearing, and whether such recall was barred by the principle underlying Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The bar against alteration or review of a final order under Section 362 is not to be applied in a rigid or overly technical manner where doing so would defeat justice. The application before the High Court was treated as one for recall, not review. A recall petition is distinct from a review petition: in recall, the court addresses an order passed without giving an affected party an opportunity of hearing, whereas review concerns an error apparent on the face of the record. On the facts, the earlier order had been passed when the revisionist had not appeared, and the recall was therefore treated as permissible.

Conclusion: The High Court was justified in recalling the earlier order, and no error was found in the impugned order. The appeal was not liable to succeed.

---