https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412326 An application under Section 482 CrPC to recall or clarify observations in a final bail order was held not maintainable because Section 362 CrPC barred alteration or review after the order had disposed of the matter. The Court held that the observations flowed from the earlier reasoning and required no clarification, and that the recognised exceptions to the statutory bar, including lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, absence of hearing, or abuse of process, were not attracted. In the absence of express statutory power, the court became functus officio and could not use inherent powers as a substitute for review. en-us Tue, 14 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Sep 2021 09:02:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412326 An application under Section 482 CrPC to recall or clarify observations in a final bail order was held not maintainable because Section 362 CrPC barred alteration or review after the order had disposed of the matter. The Court held that the observations flowed from the earlier reasoning and required no clarification, and that the recognised exceptions to the statutory bar, including lack of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, absence of hearing, or abuse of process, were not attracted. In the absence of express statutory power, the court became functus officio and could not use inherent powers as a substitute for review. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 14 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412326