The Apex Court Condemned the Custom of Pronouncing the Operative Part without Reasoned Judgment

The Apex Court condemned the custom of pronouncing the operative part without reasoned judgment.

That Court ruled that, “We appreciate that the learned Judge may have delivered a number of judgments and dealt with many cases and in the interregnum period may have even faced some personal difficulty as set out in the report but that does not take away from the fact that the process which was required to be followed as set out in the judicial pronouncements has not been followed in the present case. If a judgment cannot be delivered on the same date or immediately thereafter, logically the judgment ought to have been at least reserved to facilitate the Judge to pen down the order. Result of not doing so is that the appellant being the aggrieved party is unable to avail of the legal remedy”.

Brief Facts- The appellants had submitted before the Supreme Court that the High Court judge only read out the operative part and the reasoned judgment was not accessible even after 9 months. The Apex court, hence ordered a report from the HC. In the report, the delay was recognized due to some personal difficulty of the Judge for some period of time.

The Court referred a recent judgment in Balaji Baliram Mupade & Anr. v. The State of Maharashra & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 3564 of 2020] wherein it was observed that,

We had emphasized that judicial discipline requires promptness in delivery of judgments, an aspect repeatedly emphasized by this Court when this problem gets compounded where the result may be known but not the reasons depriving the aggrieved party of opportunity to seek further judicial redressal. We have also referred to the Constitution Bench judgment of this Court delivered as far back as in 1983 in State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Jagdev singh Talwandi (1984) 1 SCC 596, which drew the attention of the High Court to serious difficulties caused on account of practice which was being increasingly adopted by several High Courts of pronouncing the final orders without reasoned judgments. We have also referred to the subsequent judgments even delivered by this Court in our aforesaid judgment but there is no purpose in repeating the same.

Advertisement

The Court in the preset case held that, we have to follow the same course of action as in the judgment referred to aforesaid and thus set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back for reconsideration of the High Court on merits, uninfluenced by the reasons which have been set out in the impugned order. Needless to say the matter would be taken up by a Bench not consisting of the member who constituted the bench earlier.

CASE: ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs. ZAIXHU XIE

Citation: SLP(C) Diary No(s). 21991/2020

CORAM: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy


The Apex Court condemned the custom of pronouncing the operative part without reasoned judgment.

Also Read: Protest Of Farmers Should Be Allowed To Continue Without Impediment: SC

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *