Pronouncing the Criminal Case Judgment in open Court

It was pointed out by the Bombay High Court in Ismail Amir Seikh vs. State of Maharashtra 1985 CR.L.J. 273. that a judgment postulates the act of judging and a written record of that act and that a good judgment truly and faithfully reflects the act of judging. It was pointed out that no judgment can be viewed to be a considered judgment unless the reasons for accepting the one and rejecting the other of the two view points are clearly mentioned in the judgment.

A judgment must contain points for determination, decision thereof and the reasons for such decisions as observed in Budhia vs. Chhotelal. [AIR 1966 Raj. 122],

It is stated in Section 353 Cr.P.C. that the judgment in a trial should be pronounced in open Court by the presiding officer. Dictation of judgment in open Court followed by intimation of conviction or acquittal is enough but, delay in transcription however much it might be is a curable irregularity [vide Iqbal vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1974 S.C. 1880.]

A plain reading of Section 353 of Cr.P.C. discloses that a judgment can be delivered in three modes, viz., by delivering the whole of the judgment, by dictating the same in the open court or by reading out the whole of judgment or by reading out the operative part of the judgment and explaining the same to the accused (or his advocate).

If the judgment is dictated to the short-hand writer after the short­hand writer transcribes the same, the judge shall sign every page thereof. This provision is incorporated in Criminal Code and naturally applies to the criminal side only.

When a civil judgment is dictated to a short-hand writer of the Court, the C.P.C. provides for the signing of the judgment and dating the judgment by the judge. It is strange that C.P.C. do not contain such a claim for the judge to sign every page of the judgment when it is dictated to the short-hand writer of the court; but nevertheless the same is adhered to by all the Judges on Civil side.

If only the operative portion of the judgment is read out, a judge shall sign and date the judgment and once again the Court provides that if the judgment was not written by the judge with his own hand then the judge shall sign every page of the judgment.

This situation also arises either when the judge dictates the judgment to the short-hand writer or dictates the judgment to type directly; since, there would be no occasion for a judge to get the judgment hand-written by another person. Prior to 1981 in some parts of the Andhra Pradesh, Munsiff Magistrates of the First Class did not have short-hand writers.

Nor the Second Class Magistrates’ Courts had any short-hand writer. These Magistrates used to write the judgments either in long-hand or used to dictate the judgments directly to the typist, who would type the judgments as dictated.

Happily, now every District Court is provided with a stenographer and Magistrate as much as a Sessions Judge is now expected to dictate the judgment to the short-hand writer instead of writing the judgment in long-hand or dictating the judgment to the typist.

Section 353 Cr.P.C. also provides that whenever a prepared judgment is pronounced in the open Court, a copy of the judgment should immediately be made available for the perusal of the parties or their counsel.

This rule provided under Section 353(4) Cr.P.C. is distinct from the clause which makes it obligatory for the court to supply a copy of the judgment to the accused in case the accused is convicted.

Infact, it is provided by the circular orders of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh that judgments on the criminal side shall be pronounced immediately after the commencement of the Court work on each day.

However, in practice, many judgments are pronounced at the fag end of the day or atleast during afternoon sessions, sq that the transcribed copy of the judgment becomes ready after the judgment is dictated by the judge to the short-hand writer during the morning hours of the day.