<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Section 362 CrPC bars review of criminal final orders; courts functus officio; Order XLVII CPC review not maintainable</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91879</link>
    <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 05.05.2021. The Court held that criminal courts are functus officio once a judgment or final order is signed and Section 362 CrPC bars alteration or review thereof except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors or where another statute expressly permits. A review petition filed under Order XLVII CPC in proceedings initiated under the CrPC was held not maintainable; the High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain such review. The attempted recall/review did not qualify as permissible &quot;procedural review&quot; nor raised any fresh, unheard matter, and thus the challenged High Court order was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:40:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:40:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=845608" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Section 362 CrPC bars review of criminal final orders; courts functus officio; Order XLVII CPC review not maintainable</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91879</link>
      <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order dated 05.05.2021. The Court held that criminal courts are functus officio once a judgment or final order is signed and Section 362 CrPC bars alteration or review thereof except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors or where another statute expressly permits. A review petition filed under Order XLVII CPC in proceedings initiated under the CrPC was held not maintainable; the High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain such review. The attempted recall/review did not qualify as permissible &quot;procedural review&quot; nor raised any fresh, unheard matter, and thus the challenged High Court order was quashed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2025 08:40:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=91879</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>