‘Judgment’ means a judicial opinion which tells the story of the case; what the case is about; how Court is resolving the case and why. A ‘Judgment’ should be coherent, systematic and logically organized. It should enable the reader to trace the fact to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles.

Many times it is very difficult to appreciate what a Learned Judge wants to convey. A ‘Judgment’ replicates the individuality of the Judge and therefore, it is indispensable it should be written with care and caution. We are conscious of the fact, Judges may be overburdened with pending cases and arrears. But, quality can never be sacrificed for quantity. What Court says, and how it says it, is equally important as what Court decides.

– Hon’ble Justice M.R. Shah, Shakuntala Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [Criminal Appeal No. 876 of 2021].

We deem it fit to advert to fine words of wisdom imparted to us by Hon’ble P.B. Mukharji, CJ, in ‘The New Jurisprudence: The Grammar of Modern Law’.

“The supreme requirement of a good Judgment is reason. Judgment is of value on strength of its reason. The weight of a Judgment, its binding character or its persuasive character, depends on presentation and articulation of reason. Reason, therefore, is soul and spirit of a good Judgment.”

– Hon’ble Justice Dipankar Datta, Asma Lateef v. Shabbir Ahmad, [Civil Appeal No. 9695 of 2013] decided on 12.01.2024.

_____

Amanullah v. State of U.P., AIR 1973 SC 1370 held, normally, it has to be presumed, all arguments actually pressed at hearing in a High Court were noticed and appropriately dealt with. If a Judgment of a High Court does not contain discussion on a point, that point should be assumed prima facie not to have been argued unless contrary is specifically shown.

– Hon’ble Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Naresh Kumar v. State of Delhi, [Criminal Appeal No.1751 of 2017] decided on 08.07.2024.

_____

Judgment must be in a simple language and should not be verbose. Court can always comment upon conduct of parties. However, findings must be confined only to such conduct which has a bearing on decision making. Judgment cannot contain Judge’s personal opinion. Judge has to decide and not preach. Judgment is neither a thesis nor a piece of literature. Judgment under question contains personal opinion of Judge’s advice.

– Hon’ble Justice Abhay S. Oka, In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents, [Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2023] decided on 20.08.2024.

_____

Judges and Magistrates must be guided by considerations of justice, fair-play and restraint. It has also been recognised, pronouncements should not normally depart from sobriety, moderation and reserve [State of U.P. v. Mohd. Naim, 1963 SCC OnLine SC 22]. These observations must be borne in mind by every Judge. Also see, In Re: ‘K’, Judicial Officer, (2001) 3 SCC 54.

Judges are human beings. All human beings are prone to committing mistakes. To err is human. Therefore, personal criticism of Judges or recording findings on conduct of Judges in Judgments must be avoided.

– Hon’ble Justice Abhay S. Oka, Sonu Agnihotri v. Chandra Shekhar, [Criminal Appeal Nos. 388-389 of 2024] decided on 22.11.2024.

_____

Judges are human beings and at times they do commit mistakes. The sheer pressure of work at times may lead to such errors.

– Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala, Mahabir v. State of Haryana, [Criminal Appeal Nos. 5560-5561 of 2024] decided on 29.01.2025.

_____

Sonu Agnihotri v. Chandra Shekhar, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3382 implored, Courts higher in judicial hierarchy should refrain from commenting on conduct and calib of Judicial Officers. We are of firm opinion, strictures passed by High Court against Kaushal Singh-Judicial Officer were uncalled for and hence, same are expunged.

– Hon’ble Justice Sandeep Mehta, Kaushal Singh v. State of Rajasthan, [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2254 of 2025] decided on 18.07.2025.

_____

It is a settled principle, a Judgment is an authority only for what it decides. When a Judgment fails to address other issues raised, it is said to be ‘sub silentio’ and cannot be held as a binding precedent on those undecided issues. When a Judgment of a Court is silent on questions of law either raised earlier but not decided, or raised in subsequent proceedings, it is settled law, Constitutional Courts are empowered to decide such questions of law independently and earlier Judgment cannot be cited as a binding precedent or conclusive.

– Hon’ble Justice R. Mahadevan, Odisha State Financial Corporation v. Vigyan Chemical Industries, [Civil Appeal No. 10047 of 2025] decided on 05.08.2025.

_____

Before we leave, with some anguish, we cannot but indicate, application of mind is not proportionate to number of pages. Judicious consideration is sum and substance of adjudication and Courts/Tribunals should restrain themselves from engaging in mere rhetoric by stating law in general without particular reference to facts.

– Hon’ble Justice K. Vinod Chandran, M/s C.L. Gupta Export Ltd. v. Adil Ansari, [Civil Appeal No. 2864 of 2022] decided on 25.08.2025.