LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court order can be set aside for not providing reasons for its decision.
CASE TYPE: Criminal
Case Name: Jitender Kumar @ Jitender Singh vs. The State of Bihar
Judgment Date: May 10, 2019
Date of the Judgment: May 10, 2019
Citation: (2019) INSC 460
Judges: Abhay Manohar Sapre, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J.
Can a High Court dismiss a petition without providing any reasons? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in a criminal appeal, emphasizing the importance of reasoned judgments. The court found that the High Court of Judicature at Patna had dismissed a petition without any discussion or reasoning, leading to the case being sent back for a fresh decision. This case highlights the necessity of judicial transparency and the application of mind in legal proceedings.
The judgment was delivered by a division bench comprising of Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre authored the judgment.
Case Background
The case originated from a criminal matter where the appellant, Jitender Kumar, was summoned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, to face trial for offences under Sections 302, 325, 326, 331, 352 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. This was in connection with P.S. Case No. 154 of 2013. Jitender Kumar then filed a petition before the High Court of Judicature at Patna under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
The High Court dismissed the petition, which led to the current appeal before the Supreme Court. The appellant sought relief from the order of the High Court, arguing that it did not provide any reasoning for its dismissal.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2013 | P.S. Case No. 154 of 2013 was registered. |
| April 9, 2015 | Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, summoned the appellant to face trial. |
| 2016 | Session Trial No. 280 of 2016 commenced in the Court of First Additional & Sessions Judge, Jamui. |
| March 28, 2019 | High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissed the appellant’s petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. |
| May 10, 2019 | Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal and remanded the case to the High Court. |
Legal Framework
The case primarily revolves around Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which deals with the inherent powers of the High Court. The appellant had filed a petition under this section, seeking to quash the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The High Court’s dismissal of this petition without providing reasons is the central issue.
The offences for which the appellant was summoned are under Sections 302, 325, 326, 331, 352 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. These sections pertain to murder, voluntarily causing hurt, grievous hurt, causing hurt to public servant, assault and acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 states:
“Saving of inherent power of High Court- Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”
Arguments
Appellant’s Submissions:
- The appellant argued that the High Court’s order was unsustainable because it did not provide any reasons for dismissing the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- The appellant contended that the High Court should have discussed the submissions made by the parties and given reasons for its decision.
Respondent’s Submissions:
- The respondent, the State of Bihar, likely argued in favor of the High Court’s order, though the specific arguments are not detailed in the judgment.
- The State would have argued that the High Court’s decision was correct and should be upheld.
| Main Submission | Sub-Submissions |
|---|---|
| Appellant’s Submission: The High Court order is unsustainable |
|
| Respondent’s Submission: The High Court order should be upheld. |
|
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court framed the following issue for consideration:
- Whether the High Court was right in dismissing the appellant’s petition without assigning any reasons.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision | Brief Reasons |
|---|---|---|
| Whether the High Court was right in dismissing the appellant’s petition without assigning any reasons. | The Supreme Court held that the High Court was not right in dismissing the petition without assigning any reasons. | The Supreme Court emphasized that it is obligatory for the Court to assign reasons as to why a petition is allowed or rejected. The High Court’s order lacked any discussion or reasoning on the submissions made by the parties. |
Authorities
The Supreme Court referred to the following authorities:
| Authority | Court | How it was used |
|---|---|---|
| [Not specified in the judgment] | [Not specified in the judgment] | The judgment refers to two decisions of the Supreme Court, but the specific citations are not mentioned. The Court stated that these decisions emphasized the necessity of giving reasons in support of the conclusion because it is the reason, which indicates the application of mind. |
| Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 | Supreme Court of India | The court considered the High Court’s exercise of its inherent powers under this section. |
| Sections 302, 325, 326, 331, 352 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 | Supreme Court of India | The court noted that the appellant was summoned for offences under these sections but did not delve into the merits of the charges. |
Judgment
| Submission | How the Court Treated the Submission |
|---|---|
| Appellant’s submission that the High Court order was unsustainable due to lack of reasoning. | The Court agreed that the High Court’s order was unsustainable because it did not provide any reasons for dismissing the petition. |
| Respondent’s submission that the High Court order should be upheld. | The Court did not agree with the respondent’s submission and set aside the High Court’s order. |
How each authority was viewed by the Court?
- The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of reasoned judgments as highlighted in previous decisions of the court.
- The court noted that the High Court did not properly exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the absence of any reasoning in the High Court’s order. The Court emphasized the importance of reasoned judgments and the application of mind in judicial proceedings.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Importance of Reasoned Judgments | 70% |
| Lack of Application of Mind | 30% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 20% |
| Law | 80% |
The Court’s reasoning focused on the legal requirement for a reasoned order, rather than the specific facts of the case.
The Court did not delve into the merits of the case, as it was primarily concerned with the procedural lapse of the High Court.
The Court stated, “Time and again, this Court has emphasized the necessity of giving reasons in support of the conclusion because it is the reason, which indicates the application of mind.”
The Court further observed, “It is, therefore, obligatory for the Court to assign the reasons as to why the petition is allowed or rejected, as the case may be.”
The Court also clarified, “We, however, make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issues arising in the case having formed an opinion to remand the case to the High Court for deciding it afresh on the ground mentioned above.”
There was no minority opinion in this case.
Key Takeaways
- High Courts must provide reasons for their decisions, especially when dismissing petitions.
- Lack of reasoning in a judicial order can lead to the order being set aside and the case being remanded.
- The Supreme Court emphasizes the importance of the application of mind in judicial proceedings.
- This judgment reinforces the principle that judicial orders must be transparent and reasoned.
Directions
The Supreme Court directed the following:
- The matter is remanded to the High Court for deciding the petition afresh on merits in accordance with law.
- The High Court will decide the matter on its merits uninfluenced by any of the observations made by the Supreme Court in this order.
- The parties are granted liberty to mention the matter in the High Court for its early hearing.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of this case is that a High Court order must contain reasons for its decision, especially when dismissing a petition. This judgment reinforces the existing legal position that reasoned judgments are essential for judicial transparency and accountability. There is no change in the previous position of law, but the judgment emphasizes the importance of following the existing principles.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Jitender Kumar and set aside the order of the High Court of Judicature at Patna. The case was remanded back to the High Court for a fresh decision on merits. The Supreme Court’s decision underscores the importance of reasoned judgments and the need for the judiciary to provide clear and logical explanations for their decisions. The lack of reasoning in the High Court’s order was the sole basis for the Supreme Court’s decision to remand the case.