1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. Criminal Application No. 124 of 2009 In Criminal Application No. 1452 of 2009 (decided) Ignatius v. State of Maharashtra and anr -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's Orders. Mr R. Darda, Adv for applicant. Mr A. Parihar, APP for State Coram: A.P. Bhangale, J Dated : 7th September 2009 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. When criminal application no. 1452 of 09 was called out for hearing on 20th August 2009, none appeared for applicant. This Court, with the assistance of learned Additional Public Prosecutor, perused the application and documents filed on record and after hearing learned APP, rejected the application. Applicant is seeking recall of this order. 2. By order dated 20th August 2009, criminal application 1452 of 09 has been finally disposed of. Section 362 Cr.P.C. makes it clear that a court cannot alter or review its judgment or final order after it is signed except to correct clerical or arithmetical error. As a general rule, as soon as a final order is made by a court, it becomes functus officio and has no power to review, override, alter or interfere with it. In absence of express 2 power, alteration or modification of final order order is not permissible. In other words, no power of review of an order by criminal court exists under Cr.P.C. It is settled law that power of review is not an inherent power and must be conferred on a court by a specific or express provision to that effect. No power of review has been conferred by Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 on a criminal court and therefore it cannot review an order passed finally disposing of the matter. Hence, present application is rejected. Judge. hsj