JUDGMENT 1. 1. This criminal miscellaneous petition Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code has been filed with a request to recall the order dated 6.11.1995 passed in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 320 of 1995. 2. I have heard Mr. Samdariya and the learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the record of the case. The contention of Mr. Samdariya, learned counsel for the petitioners is that the criminal Misc. Petition no. 320 of 1995 was listed before Hon'ble Shri Yadav, J. for admission on 6.11.1995 at Serial No. 54 but the case was subsequently placed before Hon'ble Shri Gupta, J. and he was not aware of the formation of another bench. His submission is that he waited in the Court of Hon'ble Shri Yadav, J. upto 3.30 p.m. when on enquiry he was informed that some cases have been transferred to the Court of Hon'ble Shri Gupta, J. and he immediately rushed to this Court and mentioned the matter but by that time the Court had already passed the orders. He has submitted that the order of the trial Court as also of the Sessions Court was against the established principle of law. He has submitted that the order be recalled and he may be given an opportunity to address the Court. In this connection he has referred to the cases of Habu v. State of Raj., 1987 (1) RLR 1 and Dev Karan v. State of Raj., 1990 RCC 618 . 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has not seriously contested this petition. 4. I have considered the matter. A reading of the cause list dated 6.11.1995 shows that the criminal Misc. Pet. no. 320 of 1995 was listed before Hon'ble Yadav, J. However, a notice was issued in the morning and some of the cases were placed before this Court and as none was present on behalf of the petitioners, it was disposed of after hearing the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The point that requires consideration is, if this Court in exercise of inherent powers can recall the order, dismissing the Cr. Misc. Petition on merits. 6. 5. The point that requires consideration is, if this Court in exercise of inherent powers can recall the order, dismissing the Cr. Misc. Petition on merits. 6. The Full Bench in the case of Habu (supra) has held that the power to recall is different than the power of altering or reviewing the judgments and that powers Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code can be and should be exercised by this Court for recalling the judgment in case the hearing is not given to the accused and case falls in one of the three conditions laid down Under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code. In this case, the Full Bench has considered all the Judgments of the Apex Court and of this Court in order to arrive at the decision. Therefore, it is now settled that this Court can recall the orders even when the case was disposed of on merits. 7. In the instant case, it cannot be disputed that the case was originally listed before Hon'ble Shri Yadav, J. and on account of a notice issued in the morning, some of the criminal Misc. cases were placed before this Court. Shri Samdariya has filed affidavit in support of the averments made in the petition. The petitioner had engaged advocate in the matter. According to the cause-list issued, the case was to be listed before Hon'ble Shri Yadav, J. It has, therefore, to be accepted that there was no mistake on the part of Shri Samdariya, counsel appearing for the petitioner when he waited in the Court of Hon'ble Yadav, J. It is just and proper to recall the order which was passed without hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners. 8. Consequently, I allow this petition and recall the order dated 6.11.1995. The matter may now be placed before the regular Bench dealing with criminal matters.Misc Petition Allowed. *******