Judgment 1. On reading the Judgment dated 09.01.2006 rendered in Bhala Ram vs. State of Rajasthan, D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 1079/2001 published in 2006 (2) Rajasthan Law Reporter 362 = [ 2006 (1) RDD 474 (Raj) (DB)], it has come to our notice that in Para 2 of the Judgment some typing mistakes have occurred that escaped our notice at the time of signing the Judgment . In Para 2 of the Judgment it was indicated as under:- “On the said first information report, the police undertook the investigation and framed charges under Sections 302, 376, 447 and 379, IPC against the appellant Bhala Ram. During the course of investigation, as many as 27 prosecution witnesses were examined....” 2. It appears that in place of “filed charge-sheet” the words “framed charges and in place of “during the course of trial” “during the course of investigation” were wrongly typed. This typing mistake needs correction. .3. The question, therefore, arises at this juncture is-Can the bona fide typing error be corrected after signing the Judgment ? 4. Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 provides as under:-“Court not to alter Judgment .- Save as otherwise provided by this Code or by other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it has signed its Judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter ore review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.” (Emphasis Supplied) 5. Explaining the scope of Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, their Lordships of Supreme Court in Smt. Sooraj Devi vs. Pyare Lal, AIR 1981 SC 736 indicated in Para 4 as under:-“A clerical or arithmetical error is an error occasioned by an accidental slip or omission of the Court. It represents that which the Court never intended to say. It is an error apparent on the face of the record and does not depend for its discovery on argument or disputation. An arithmetical error is a mistake of calculation, and a clerical error is a mistake in writing or typing. (Emphasis supplied) 6. In Master Construction Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Orissa, AIR 1996 SC 1047 their Lordships of the Supreme Court defined accidental slip or omission thus:-“The accidental slip or omission is an accidental slip or omission made by the Court. (Emphasis supplied) 6. In Master Construction Co. (P) Ltd. vs. State of Orissa, AIR 1996 SC 1047 their Lordships of the Supreme Court defined accidental slip or omission thus:-“The accidental slip or omission is an accidental slip or omission made by the Court. The obvious instance is a slip or omission to embody in the order something which the Court in fact ordered to be done. This something described as a decretal order not being in accordance with the Judgment . But the slip or omission may be attributed to the judge himself . He may say something or omit to say something which he did not intend to say or omit. This is described as a slip or omission in the Judgment itself......” 7. Obviously the error noticed by us is a clerical error occasioned by an accidental slip which the Court never intended to say. It is an error apparent on the face of record and does not depend for its discovery on argument or disputation and it can be corrected in view of Section 362 of CrPC. Learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Public Prosecutor after reading the Judgment submitted that since it was a typing mistake it can be corrected. 8. We accordingly direct that in Para 2 of Bhala Rams Judgment (Supra), the words “framed charges” and “during the course of investigation” shall be substituted by “filed charge-sheet” and “during the course of trial” and corrected version shall be read as under:- “On the said first information report, the police undertook the investigation and filed charge-sheet under Sections 302, 376, 447 and 379, IPC against the appellant Bhala Ram. During the course of trial, as many as 27 prosecution witnesses were examined.” 9. This order shall form part of Bhala Rams Judgment (Supra) and Deputy Registrar (Judicial) shall append this order alongwith the said Judgment . 10. The concerned Law Journals, in which the aforequoted Judgment was published now be asked to issue corrigendum.