TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 48
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for recalling of the common oral judgment dated 14.10.2021 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application No.17697 of 2021 and allied matters. 3. Heard learned advocate Mr. B. M. Mangukiya for the concerned applicants and learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Mitesh Amin for the respondent - State. 4. Learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya appearing for the applicants submitted that present applicants filed Criminal Misc. Application No.17697 of 2021 and allied matters under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'), wherein, the applicants have prayed that they may be granted pre-arrest bail at the time of and in the event of their arrest in connection with file No. DCST/ENF-2/AC-6/CONFIDE....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e factual matrix placed before this Court and the legal issues raised, the said common judgment be recalled. 6. Learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya has submitted that under Section 362 of the Code, this Court is not empowered to review its own judgment, however, under certain circumstances, order passed by the Criminal Court can be recalled. In support of the said submission, learned advocate Mr. Mangukiya has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vishnu Agarwal v. State of U.P. and Anr., reported in AIR 2011 SC 1232. Learned advocate has also placed reliance upon the order dated 13.01.2017 passed by this Court in the case of Rashidabanu W/o. Mohammad Asif Mohammad Husen Singwala v. State of Gujarat & O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmitted that an order passed by the Criminal Court cannot be reviewed as per the provision contained in Section 362 of the Code. Learned Public Prosecutor would further submit that even as per the decision relied on by the learned advocate for the applicants, the order can be recalled under certain circumstances. However, the case of the present applicants does not fall in any of the circumstances referred in the aforesaid two decisions. It is, therefore, urged that these applications be dismissed. 9. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and having gone through the material placed on record, it would emerge that by way of filing the present applications, the applicants have tried to re-argue the case on merits. Le....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e respondents appeared and the concerned High Court passed an order. Subsequently, application was moved for recall of the order alleging that the case was shown in the computer list and not in the main list of the High Court, hence, learned counsel of the revisionist had not noted the case and hence he did not appear. While considering the said facts, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the said application was filed for recalling of the order and not for review. While considering the recall petition, the Court does not go into the merits but simply recalls an order which was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to an affected party. 12. Now, keeping in view the aforesaid decisions, if the submissions canvassed by lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t has also considered the submissions of learned Public Prosecutor and also considered the separate compilation provided by the learned Public Prosecutor. There is a reference with regard to the complaints filed against four persons including one Mr. Afzal. The said aspect is referred in para 13 of the decision. This Court has also dealt with the contention with regard to the cancellation of the registration of the concerned dummy firm with retrospective effect. After considering the submissions canvassed by learned counsel appearing for the parties and after considering the decisions upon which reliance was placed by them, this Court passed the common oral judgment dated 14.10.2021. 15. It appears that learned advocate for the applicant....