Patna High Court
Mantu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court may modify its order to correct an inadvertent typographical error regarding the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Summary
Mantu Rai applied for bail, and the court on 24-12-2025 granted regular bail but erroneously recorded that he had a clean criminal antecedent. The petitioner later discovered that paragraph 4 of the order contained a typographical mistake, as he actually had one prior case (Sonpur P.S. Case No. 377 of 2021). The petitioner filed a modification application, supported by a supplementary affidavit filed on 15-12-2025, to correct the record. The State opposed the modification, but the court examined the affidavit and found the error to be inadvertent. In the interest of justice, the court modified the order to state that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent, leaving the rest of the order unchanged. The modification application was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether a court may modify its own order to correct a typographical error concerning the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Subjects
- bail
- modification of order
- typographical error
- criminal antecedent
- interest of justice
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11931 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90053 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2017 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Mantu Rai, aged about 35 years, Gender-Male, S/O Banaras Rai, Resident of
Village- Parmanandpur, P.S- Sonpur, District- Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 18-02-2026 Heard Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Nityanand, learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The present application has been filed for
modification of order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Criminal
Miscellaneous No. 90053 of 2025, in which, in paragraph no. 4,
it has inadvertently been typed that petitioner has clean
antecedent.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that due to incorrect information given by
the pairvikaar, he had incorrectly stated in paragraph no. 3 of the
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 90053 of 2025 that petitioner has
clean antecedent, however, after objection raised by the Registry
upon scrutiny on 24.11.2025, he had filed supplementary
affidavit on 15.12.2025 giving the details in respect of one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11931 of 2026(2) dt.18-02-2026
2/2
criminal antecedent of the petitioner. At the time of hearing of
the bail application on 24.12.2025, the aforesaid fact could not
be given leading to inadvertent typographical mistake in
paragraph no. 4 of the order dated 24.12.2025 causing non
acceptance of the bail bond of the petitioner in spite of the fact
that the petitioner was granted regular bail on 24.12.2025.
4. Considering the aforesaid inadvertent typographical
mistake in paragraph no. 4 of the order dated 24.12.2025 in
respect of the criminal antecedent of the petitioner in which
respect, the correct information is contained in paragraph no. 3
of the supplementary affidavit filed on 15.12.2025 that
petitioner has one criminal antecedent being Sonpur P.S. Case
No. 377 of 2021, I find it in the interest of justice to modify the
order dated 24.12.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.
90053 of 2025 to the extent that 'petitioner has one criminal
antecedent'. Other parts of the order dated 24.12.2025 shall
remain intact.
5. Accordingly, the present modification application
stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…