The Supreme Court has strongly criticized the Allahabad High Court for misusing Section 362 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The High Court had changed a murder conviction under Section 302 IPC to a lesser offence under Section 304 Part II IPC, claiming it was just correcting a "clerical error."

The top court made it clear that Section 362 CrPC only allows correction of clerical or mathematical errors, and cannot be used to change the substance of a judgment.

“No Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error,” reads Section 362 CrPC.

Read Also:- Supreme Court on Pahalgam Terror Link Claim: "Children Should Not Suffer for Accusations Against Parents"

In this case, the High Court had originally confirmed the murder conviction in May 2018. However, in February 2019, after a "correction application" was filed, it changed the conviction to a lesser charge and reduced the sentence. This move was later challenged before the Supreme Court.

Although the High Court said it was only correcting a minor error, the Supreme Court found that the entire reasoning behind the judgment was changed.

“We fail to understand how the High Court, despite the clear and simple wording of Section 362, made such a serious mistake,” said the bench of Justice BR Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih.

Read Also:- Supreme Court: Prospective Accused Cannot Oppose CBI Investigation Order

The Supreme Court referred to its earlier rulings in Smt. Sooraj Devi v. Pyare Lal (1981) and Naresh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1981), where similar misuse of Section 362 by High Courts was struck down.

“This Court had expressed its great concern that the High Court should have committed this grievous error,” the bench observed.

Case : Ramyash @ Lal Bahadur v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Another Etc

Appearances - For Appellant: AOR Ashutosh Yadav, Advocates Narender Singh Yadav, Smita Singh Deo, Surjeet Singh, Amardeep Gaur, NBV Srinivasa Reddy, and Vishal Tiwari.

For Respondents: AORs Vishnu Shankar Jain, Nanita Sharma, Aswathi M.K., Advocates Shaurya Krishna, Sushil Balwada, Nagendra Singh, Sanjay Gupta, Naman Raj Singh, Gurick Jassar, Mohit Kumar Singh, Vivek Sharma, Sabnam Sultana, and Deepanshu Rana.