New Delhi, December 25
The Supreme Court has severely criticised the Punjab and Haryana High Court for dismissing an appeal by the Punjab Government against the acquittal of an accused in a drug trafficking case without citing any reason, saying that such a verdict has rendered the order unsustainable.
“The manner in which the appeal against the acquittal has been dealt with by the High Court leaves much to be desired. Reasons introduce clarity in an order,” a Bench comprising Mr Justice Doraiswamy Raju and Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat said, setting aside the High Court order upholding the acquittal of accused Bhag Singh.
Allowing a special leave petition by the Punjab Government, the Bench directed the High Court to entertain the appeal again after issuing a formal notice to the accused. The police had arrested Bhag Singh on April 26, 1995, for allegedly carrying a large quantity of opium.
Taking exception to the High Court dismissing the appeal by a terse four-word verdict — heard, no merit, dismissed — the apex court said “On plainest consideration of justice, it ought to have set forth its reasons, howsoever brief, in its order indicative of an application of its mind, all the more when its order is amenable to further avenues of challenge.”
Stating that right to reason was an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, the court said this was all the more necessary for the High Court when it was examining the judgement of the trial court on appeal.
“If the trial court was at lapse in this regard, the High Court was obliged to undertake such an exercise by entertaining the appeal,” the Bench said, also criticising the trial judge for his failure to perform his duty in examining the facts of the case properly.
Referring to its several earlier pronouncements on the importance of giving a reasoned order, the Bench said failure to explain the same would amount to denial of justice because reasons were “live links between the mind of the decision taker and the controversy in question.”
“The emphasis on recording reasons is that if it reveals the inscrutable face of the sphinx, it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in
adjudging the validity of the decision,” the apex court said.
