Supreme Court of India was dealing with the petition challenging the judgment and order dated 30.03.2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeals by which the High Court has allowed the said appeals preferred by the original accused and has acquitted them for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.
Appellant’s Contention:
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State have drawn the Court’s attention to the fact that the arguments in the appeals were concluded on 30.03.2019 and the HC allowed the said appeals on the very day and pronounced the operative portion of the order and set aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court and directed the accused who was in jail to be released, but a reasoned judgment and order was pronounced after a period of approximately five months.
Learned counsel has heavily relied upon the recent decision of the Court in the case of Balaji Baliram Mupade & Anr. versus The State of Maharashtra, by which such a practice of pronouncing the final order without a reasoned judgment has been deprecated.
SC’s Observations:
After hearing both the sides SC stated that despite the strong observations made by this Court as far as back in the year 1984 and thereafter repeatedly reiterated, still the practice of pronouncing only the operative portion of the judgment without a reasoned judgment and to pass a reasoned judgment subsequently has been continued. Such a practice of pronouncing the final orders without a reasoned judgment has to be stopped and discouraged.
SC Held:
After evaluating submissions made by both the parties the SC held that “from the record of proceedings it appears that the reasoned judgment was pronounced and uploaded after a period of almost five months. Therefore, we set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court without further entering into the merits of the case nor expressing anything on merits in favour of either party. We remand the appeals to the High Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and on its own merits.”
Case Title: Indrajeet Yadav v. Santosh Singh and Anr.
Bench: J. M. R. Shah and J B.V. Nagarathna
Citation: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 577 OF 2022
Decided on: 19th April 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
