AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 185 wordsSunita Yadav, J
This petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has been filed for correction of typographical error crept in the order dated 22/08/2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 35969/2023.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that application under section 439 of Cr.P.C. was allowed by this Court vide order dated 22/08/2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 35969/2023, but due to typographical error in the order instead No. 353/2023” it has been wrongly mentioned as “FIR No. 730/2023” .
In view of aforesaid and perusal of the record, it appears that in the order dated 22/08/2023 due to typographical mistake instead of “crime No. 353/2023” it has been wrongly mentioned as “FIR No. 730/2023”.
“Accordingly, this petition is allowed and it is directed that in place of “FIR No. 730/2023 it be read as “crime No. 353/2023” .
The rest of order dated 22/08/2023 shall be kept intact. This order shall be read in conjunction with the order dated 22/08/2023 passed in M.Cr.C. No. 35969/2023. A copy of this order passed today be kept in the record of M.Cr.C. No. 35969/2023.
Certified copy as per rules.