Quoting Section 362 of the CrPC, the apex court said the procedural code “expressly provides that no court which has signed its judgement or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct clerical or arithmetical error.”

The only option for an aggrieved person is to file a fresh petition citing additional or fresh grounds to seek a review of the said order or judgement, a bench of Justices Tarun Chatterjee and P Sathasivam said.

The apex court made the observation while quashing a Madras High Court order directing CBI inquiry into allegations of smuggling in the State’s forest department and the reported torture of the complainant K V Rajendran by local Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) for exposing the alleged scandal.

In the instant case, Rajendran had initially filed a petition for a CBI inquiry into the allegations which was disposed off by the High Court in 1998 saying that there was no need for a probe by the Central investigating agency.

However, in 2002, Rajendran filed an interlocutory application again seeking a CBI probe into the allegations which were conceded by the High Court by invoking its powers under Section 482 CrPC.

Section 482 CrPC empowers High Courts to pass any order or to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

But the apex court said the inherent powers vested under Section 482 does not grant authority to the High Court to review its own order.

“If a matter is covered by an express letter of law, the court cannot give a go-by to the statutory provisions and instead evolve a new provision in the garb of inherent jurisdiction,” the bench observed.