Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4367 (RAJ)

TAUFIK AHMED S/O SH. KABIR AHMED v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

CRLMA/38/2025 · 2025-07-04

Anand Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 38/2025 Taufik Ahmed S/o Sh. Kabir Ahmed, R/o Gram Khushpuri, Tehsil And Police Station District Nuh (Haryana). ----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Moammad Aslam For Respondent(s) : Mr. J.S. Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND SHARMA Order 04/07/2025 1. By way of filing the instant misc. application, the petitioner has prayed for recalling/modifying the order dated 14.09.2022 passed by this Court in D.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 4794/2022. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that while deciding the above petition No. 4794/2022, this Court directed for releasing the vehicle in question on furnishing bank guarantee of Rs.3 lakhs along with two sureties of the like amount satisfaction. 3. Learned counsel would submit that in similar matter subsequently, an order dated 09.01.2025 has been passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 19/2025 wherein no such condition has been imposed and the condition imposed earlier by the trial Court has been deleted by this Court. (2 of 2) [CRLMA-38/2025] 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he is also seeking similar relief for deletion of condition of bank guarantee of Rs.3 lakhs. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application on the ground that the relief claimed in the application is virtually review of the order dated 14.09.2022 passed by this Court and amounts to making substantial changes in the order which is not permissible as per the provisions of Cr.P.C. 6. I have considered the submissions made at Bar and the record of the instant application. 7. The instant application has been filed after expiry of more than two and a half years from the date of passing of order dated 14.09.2022 for which, no sufficient explanation has been given in the application. Even otherwise, the relief claimed by the petitioner is to seek substantial changes in the order dated 14.09.2022. The modification, which is being sought is not in the nature of clerical correction in the order. Power of review is not available in the criminal jurisprudence. 10. Hence, in the light of above, the instant criminal misc. application is hereby dismissed. (ANAND SHARMA),J Neeru/17