SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 104

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G. N. Ray, K. Venkataswami
STATE OF U.P., APPELLANT
Versus
HARIPAL SINGH AND ANOTHER, RESPONDENTS.
Criminal Appeal No. ... of 1996 (Arising out of SLP No. 1874 of 1993),
decided on January 15, 1996.

Importance of providing reasons for the dismissal of appeals

Headnote:

Appeal - Acquittal Order - Lack of Reasoning

Fact of the Case:

The State of Uttar Pradesh appealed against the acquittal order of the respondent-accused under Section 302 read with Sections 307 and 34 IPC. The appeal was summarily dismissed without providing any reason.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found the dismissal of the appeal without any reasoning to be unfortunate and improper, citing a previous case where a similar order was deprecated. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the dismissal order, and directed the High Court to dispose of the matter within four months.

Issues: Lack of reasoning in the dismissal of the appeal

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons for the dismissal of appeals and set aside the improper order, directing the High Court to reconsider the matter.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the dismissal order was set aside, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for disposal within four months.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. It appears that the appeal was preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the order of acquittal dated 24-5-1989 passed by the Special Sessions Judge, Pilibhit in Case No. 153 of 1986. The said sessions case was filed against the respondent-accused under Section 302 read with Sections 307 and 34 IPC. The leave application was dismissed summarily without indicating any reason and the consequential order of dismissal of appeal was also passed without indicating any reason. It is really unfortunate that the appeal was disposed of without giving any reason whatsoever. On 26-4-1988, against a similar order of dismissal in limine passed by the Allahabad High Court in State of U.P v. Jagdish Singh (Crl. A. No. 291 of 1988, SLP (Cri) No. 3459 of 1989) (an appeal) was moved before this Court and a three Judges Bench of this Court deprecated such order disposing of the appeal without giving any reason. Unfortunately, a similar improper order has been passed in this case. To say the least, it is a sorry state of affairs. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the order of dismissal of the appeal in limine and send the matter back to the High Court with a direction to dispose of the matter within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.

3. The appeal is allowed accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top