Section 403 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 lays down an important principle of finality in criminal proceedings. Once a court has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, it cannot ordinarily alter or review that decision.
The provision permits only a limited correction of clerical or arithmetical errors, unless the BNSS itself or another law for the time being in force specifically provides otherwise. Section 403 substantially continues the principle contained in Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Meaning of Court Not to Alter Judgment
A judgment or final order becomes final, for the purpose of Section 403, once the court has signed it. After that stage, the same court cannot ordinarily reopen the matter merely because it believes that another decision would have been preferable or because a party seeks reconsideration.
The section therefore creates a statutory bar against:
- alteration of a signed judgment or final order; and
- review of a signed judgment or final order.
The limited exception is the correction of:
- clerical errors; and
- arithmetical errors.
The prohibition is also subject to any contrary provision contained in the BNSS or any other law currently in force.
Statutory Basis
Section 403 of BNSS, 2023
Section 403 provides that, except as otherwise provided by the Sanhita or any other law for the time being in force, no court, after signing its judgment or final order disposing of a case, may alter or review it except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.
The provision is contained in Chapter XXIX of the BNSS, which deals with judgments.
Object and Purpose
The principal purpose of Section 403 is to ensure finality and certainty in criminal proceedings.
If criminal courts could freely reopen and alter their signed judgments, litigation could continue indefinitely before the same court. Section 403 prevents such uncertainty and requires parties to use the remedies provided by law, such as appeal, revision or another legally recognised procedure.
The provision therefore serves to:
- maintain finality of judicial decisions;
- prevent repeated reconsideration of concluded matters by the same court;
- promote certainty in criminal proceedings;
- prevent misuse of the judicial process; and
- ensure that challenges to a judgment are pursued through the appropriate legal remedy.
Essential Elements
1. A Judgment or Final Order Must Have Been Passed
Section 403 applies to:
- a judgment; or
- a final order disposing of a case.
The provision is therefore concerned with decisions that bring the relevant case or proceeding to a conclusion.
2. The Judgment or Final Order Must Have Been Signed
The statutory bar becomes operative when the court has signed its judgment or final order.
After the judgment or final order has been signed, the court cannot ordinarily alter or review it.
3. Alteration or Review Is Generally Prohibited
The court cannot reconsider the merits of its signed judgment merely because:
- a party requests reconsideration;
- the court subsequently takes a different view of the facts or law; or
- an error in the reasoning is alleged.
The remedy for a substantive challenge must ordinarily be pursued before the appropriate forum in accordance with the procedure established by law.
4. Clerical or Arithmetical Errors May Be Corrected
Section 403 permits the correction of clerical or arithmetical errors.
A clerical error may include an accidental mistake in recording or typing the judgment.
An arithmetical error may arise from a mistake in calculation.
The power to correct such errors does not authorise the court to reconsider the merits of the case or substantially change the decision already made.
5. Exceptions Provided by Law
The opening words of Section 403 preserve exceptions where:
- the BNSS itself provides otherwise; or
- another law for the time being in force authorises the relevant court to alter, review, recall or otherwise modify an order.
Therefore, the prohibition under Section 403 is subject to express statutory provisions that provide a different procedure.
Nature of Section 403
Section 403 is a procedural provision that restricts the power of a criminal court after it has signed a judgment or final order disposing of a case.
The provision does not generally permit a criminal court to exercise a power of review similar to the review jurisdiction available in certain civil proceedings. Criminal courts must exercise powers of reconsideration or modification only where such power is specifically authorised by law.
The underlying principle is that, after finally disposing of the case, the court ordinarily becomes functus officio in relation to the concluded decision. This means that the court has generally completed its authority to decide that matter and cannot reopen it except in accordance with law.
Scope of Section 403
Section 403 applies broadly to criminal courts after they have signed:
- a judgment; or
- a final order disposing of a case.
It does not prevent the correction of clerical or arithmetical errors.
It also does not override a specific statutory provision that expressly permits a court to modify, recall or reconsider an order in particular circumstances.
The precise scope of any exception depends on the language of the applicable statutory provision.
Important Distinctions
Clerical Error and Error on Merits
A clerical error is an accidental mistake in recording the decision, such as a typographical or similar inadvertent error.
An error on merits concerns the correctness of the court’s reasoning, findings or conclusions. Section 403 does not generally permit the court to reopen a signed judgment merely to reconsider such an error.
Correction and Review
Correction of a clerical or arithmetical error is limited to rectifying an accidental or computational mistake.
Review involves reconsidering the merits of the decision. Section 403 generally prohibits such review unless it is expressly authorised by the BNSS or another law.
Alteration by the Same Court and Challenge Before a Higher Court
Section 403 restricts the power of the court that signed the judgment or final order to alter or review it.
A party seeking to challenge the correctness of the decision may, where permitted by law, use an appropriate remedy such as:
- appeal;
- revision; or
- another statutory remedy.
These remedies operate through the legal framework provided by the BNSS and other applicable laws.
BNSS and CrPC
Section 403 of BNSS substantially corresponds to Section 362 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
The core legal principle has been retained. Under both provisions, once a criminal court has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, it cannot ordinarily alter or review that decision except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error.
The change from Section 362 of the CrPC to Section 403 of BNSS is primarily structural and relates to the reorganisation and renumbering of provisions under the new criminal procedure legislation.
Case Law
Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa
The Supreme Court held that criminal courts do not possess a general power to review their judgments and that the prohibition contained in the corresponding provision of the CrPC must be respected.
The decision remains relevant for understanding the general principle underlying Section 403 where the statutory language has substantially continued.
State of Kerala v. M.M. Manikantan Nair
The Supreme Court emphasised the limited nature of the power available to criminal courts after the pronouncement and signing of a judgment. A substantive reconsideration of the decision cannot ordinarily be undertaken in the absence of statutory authority.
The case is relevant to the distinction between correcting an accidental error and undertaking an impermissible review of the merits.
State of Punjab v. Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar
The Supreme Court reiterated that a criminal court does not have a general power to review or alter its final judgment except to the limited extent permitted by law.
Judicial principles developed under Section 362 of the CrPC remain relevant to the interpretation of Section 403 where the provisions are substantially similar.
Example
A criminal court signs a judgment convicting an accused person and imposing a sentence. Later, the court discovers that the judgment contains a typographical mistake in recording a date or a clear mathematical error in a calculation.
The court may correct such clerical or arithmetical error.
However, the court cannot ordinarily reopen the entire case and change its findings of guilt or innocence merely because it subsequently believes that a different conclusion would have been appropriate. Any substantive challenge must ordinarily be pursued through the remedy provided by law.
Important BNSS Provisions
Section 392
Section 392 deals with judgment and is relevant to understanding the judicial decision-making process before the final judgment is signed.
Section 403
Section 403 prohibits a court from altering or reviewing its signed judgment or final order disposing of a case, except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors or where another applicable law provides otherwise.
Appeal and Revision Provisions
The appeal and revision provisions of BNSS provide separate statutory mechanisms for challenging decisions before competent higher courts in appropriate cases.
Common Confusions
Can a criminal court correct every mistake in its judgment?
No.
Section 403 permits correction of clerical or arithmetical errors. It does not generally permit the court to reconsider the merits of its judgment or substantially change its decision.
Can a court review its criminal judgment because it later changes its mind?
Generally, no.
Once the judgment or final order disposing of the case has been signed, Section 403 ordinarily prevents the same court from altering or reviewing it, unless a specific legal provision permits such action.
Does Section 403 prevent appeals?
No.
Section 403 restricts alteration or review by the court that has signed the judgment or final order. A challenge through appeal, revision or another remedy may be available where authorised by law.
Topic at a Glance
- BNSS Section: Section 403.
- Subject: Court not to alter judgment.
- Main principle: A signed judgment or final order disposing of a case cannot ordinarily be altered or reviewed by the same court.
- Permitted correction: Clerical or arithmetical errors.
- Other exceptions: Where the BNSS or another law for the time being in force provides otherwise.
- Purpose: Finality, certainty and prevention of repeated reconsideration.
- Corresponding CrPC provision: Section 362.
Quick Revision
- Section 403 prohibits alteration or review of a signed judgment or final order disposing of a case.
- The same court ordinarily cannot reopen the merits of its final decision.
- Clerical errors may be corrected.
- Arithmetical errors may also be corrected.
- The provision is subject to contrary provisions contained in BNSS or another law for the time being in force.
- Section 403 does not create a general power of review for criminal courts.
- A substantive challenge must ordinarily be pursued through appeal, revision or another legally recognised remedy.
- Section 403 substantially corresponds to Section 362 of the CrPC.
- The distinction between correcting an accidental error and reconsidering the merits of a case is central to the provision.
ALSO READ: Section 402 – Special reasons to be recorded in certain cases
Conclusion
Section 403 of the BNSS, 2023 protects the finality of criminal judgments and final orders by restricting the power of the same court to alter or review them after they have been signed. At the same time, it permits the correction of clerical and arithmetical mistakes and preserves exceptions expressly provided by law. The provision therefore balances the need for finality in criminal adjudication with the limited necessity of correcting accidental errors.
