Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 220 (JK)

Mohd. Ismail Sohil v. State Of J. &K.

2009-05-11

MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN ATTAR

body2009
1. This application is filed seeking clarification of judgment handed down by this Court in HC (W) Petition No. 03/2009 dated 05th of May, 2009. 2. In this application it is stated that in operative part of the judgment instead of detention order No. DMR/PSA/2008/14, detention order No. DMR/PSA/2008/16 has been mentioned. 3. Heard learned counsel for applicant. 4. The mistake which has crept in the judgment is not attributable to the petitioner. The settled principle of law is that nobody shall suffer because of act of the Court. When such an instance is brought to the notice of the Court, it casts duty on the court to correct the mistake in order to keep the record straight, as record of the High Court is being rolled in perpetuity and correct record therefore is to be maintained. This duty is traceable to section 94 of Constitution of J&K read with Article 215 Constitution of India. This Court being court of record has to correct the mistakes. 5. For the reasons mentioned and grounds stated in the application coupled with submissions made at the bar, this application is allowed. It is provided that in operative part of the order dated 05th of May, 2009 passed in HC (W) Petition No. 03/2009 titled Mohd. Ismail Sohil Vs. State of J&K and ors. instead of "detention order No. DMR/PSA/2008/16" it shall be read as "detention order No. DMR/PSA/2008/14". 6. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that instead of Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Kuldeep Singh Parihar, Advocate had appeared as counsel in the case. It is provided that instead of "Mr. Vishal Sharma", "Mr. Kuldeep Singh Parihar" shall be read as counsel for petitioner. 7. This order shall form part of order dated 05th of May, 2009. This application is, accordingly, disposed of.