Procedure to be followed after pronouncing the Judgment

The general rule is that no Court can alter the judgment after the judgment is pronounced and signed by the Court.

This rule holds good for any variety of judgments whether it is on the civil side, on the criminal side, or on the revenue side or on the constitutional side. With reference to constitutional matters, the Courts of record have extraordinary powers with reference to every part of the list including judgment.

On the civil side, a Court is empowered to reconsider its decision through the process of Review. Under the criminal law, the powers of review are not vested with any Court.

However, another general principle with reference to judgments applicable both to civil and criminal side is that a judge is always empowered to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. If, a judgment or a final order is once signed, no Criminal Court can revise or alter the same even if any illegality is later discovered.

If such illegality or omission is noticed by the Court after the signing of the judgment, such illegality or omission has to be brought to the notice of the High Court or to the Court of Sessions under their revisional jurisdiction for necessary action.

As pointed out in Surendra [(1954) 3 SCC 194,] upto the moment of delivery of judgment, judges have the right to change their mind and even draft a judgment signed before hand can be changed before it is pronounced or delivered.

It was observed in Sangam [AIR 1966 All. 221] by the Full Bench that a judgment orally dictated in open Court can be completely changed before it is signed and sealed subject to the condition that notice is given to all the parties concerned and heard afresh.

In practice, however, a judge ponders over various theories before he comes to a conclusion and then only a judge starts dictating the judgment.

Once a judgment is dictated, it is seldom altered by the judge except making a few improvements or making a few deletions here and there to make the judgment as tidy as possible.

But, once a judgment is pronounced in the open Court, no judge would ever alter the judgment on the ground that the judgment was not signed by the time alterations are made. In theory a judgment is completed only when it is pronounced and signed.

Mere pronouncement of the judgment without signing the same is not tantamount to delivering the judgment. But, as pointed out above, in practice, no judge would be inclined to alter the judgment after it was pronounced, even though it was not signed.

On the ground that procedure is intended to dispense justice effectively but not to dispense with justice, it was pointed out in Bhaghubhai [AIR 1937 Cal. 334.] that even Criminal Courts have power to ignore their own orders passed either under a mistake or owing to fraud; the Madhya Pradesh High Court has observed in Manik Chand [AIR 1957 M.P. 215] that Section 362 Cr.P.C. is no bar to the review of an oral order.

It may be pointed out in this context that there was never the practice of passing an oral order in the State of Andhra Pradesh and the question of reviewing the same therefore, does not arise.

The provisions of Section 362 Cr.P.C. are so absolute that it was held in Sankatha [AIR 1962 S.C. 1208] that even a Sessions Judge cannot review or restore to file an order dismissing an appeal.

However, the Gujarat High Court pointed out in Addulani 1979 [Cri.L.J.Noc. 146.] that the embargo created by Section 362 Cr.P.C. does not operate against interlocutory orders.

In consonance with this view, it was held in Mirza Mohammed [AIR 1960 J& K 1.] that a Magistrate can pass a different order at a later stage of the case from what he had ordered earlier.

Section 362 envisages that a judge can correct clerical or arithmetical error in the judgment even after the delivery of the same.

A clerical error is a mistake in writing or typing while an arithmetical mistake is an error of calculation occasioned by an accidental slip or omission on the part of the court.

It was pointed out in Sooraj [AIR 1981 S.C. 736] that the clerical error as well as arithmetical error or patent errors and are not latent errors.