The Delhi High Court has held that once final arguments in a criminal trial are concluded and the matter is reserved for judgment, the judge who heard the case is duty-bound to pronounce the verdict even if he or she is subsequently transferred.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Crl.M.C. 9064/2025 and Crl.M.A. 37956/2025
Decided On: 05.01.2026
Parvesh Mann Vs. State NCT of Delhi
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dr. Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Citation: : MANU/DE/0050/2026
Print Page82. Preparation of Tabulated Charts in all the
judgments:
82.1 All trial Courts dealing with criminal matters
shall, at the conclusion of the judgment, incorporate
tabulated charts summarizing: -
a. Witnesses examined,
b. Documents exhibited, and
c. Material objects (muddamal) produced and
exhibited.
82.2. These charts shall form an appendix or
concluding segment of the judgment and shall be
prepared in a clear, structured and easily
comprehensible format.
83. Standardized Chart of Witnesses
83.1. Each criminal judgment shall contain a witness
chart with at least the following columns:
a. Serial Number
b. Name of the Witness
c. Brief Description/Role of the Witness, such
as: Informant, Eye-witness, Medical
Jurist/Doctor, Investigating Officer (I.O.),
Panch Witness, etc.
83.2. The description should be succinct but
sufficient to indicate the evidentiary character of the
witness. This structured presentation will allow quick
reference to the nature of testimony, assist in locating
the witness in the record, and minimize ambiguity.
83.3. Specimen Chart for Witnesses Examined
Prosecution
Witness No.
Name of
Witness
Description
1 Mr. X Eye-witness
2 Mr. Y Witness of last seen
circumstance
3 Ms. Z Medical Jurist
4 Mr. A Investigating Officer
5 Mr. B Complainant/First
Informant
84. Standardized Chart of Exhibited Documents
84.1 A separate chart shall be prepared for all
documents exhibited during trial. This chart shall
include:
a. Exhibit Number;
b. Description of document;
c. The Witness who proved or attested the
document.
84.2 Illustratively, the description may include:
FIR, complaint, panchnamas, medical certificates,
FSL reports, seizure memos, site plans, dying
declarations, etc.
84.3. The requirement of specifying the witness who
proved the document ensures traceability of proof
and assist the Court in appreciating compliance with
the Indian Evidence Act, 1872/Bharatiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, 2023.
84.4. Specimen Chart for Exhibited Documents
Exhibit
No.
Description of the
Exhibit
Proved
by/Attested by
1 Inquest
Panchnama/Memo
PW-1
2 Recovery
Panchnama/Memo
PW-2
3 Arrest Memo PW-3
4 Post-mortem Report PW-4
5 FSL Report PW-5
85. Standardized Chart of Material
Objects/Muddamals
85.1 Whenever material objects are produced and
marked as exhibits, the trial Court shall prepare a
third chart with:
a. Material Object (M.O.) Number;
b. Description of the Object;
c. Witness who proved the Object’s Relevance
(e.g., weapon, clothing, tool, article seized
under panchnama, etc.)
85.2. This enables clarity regarding the physical
evidence relied upon.
85.3.Specimen Chart for Material
Objects/Muddamals
Material
Object No.
Description of the
Exhibit
Proved
by/Attested by
1 Weapon of Offence PW-1
2 Clothing of
accused/victim
PW-2
3 Mobile
Phone/Electronic
Object
PW-3
4 Vehicle PW-4
5 Purse/earrings/identity
card
PW-5
86. Special Provisions for Cases Involving
Voluminous Evidence
86.1. In complex cases, such as conspiracies,
economic offences or trials involving voluminous oral
or documentary evidence, the list of witnesses and
exhibits may be substantially long. Where the
number of witnesses or documents is unusually
large, the trial Court may prepare charts only for the
material, relevant, and relied-upon witnesses and
documents, clearly indicating that the chart is
confined to such items. This ensures that the charts
remain functional reference tools rather than
unwieldy compilations.
87. Application to Defence Witnesses and
Evidence
87.1. The aforesaid directions shall apply, mutatis
mutandis, to all witnesses examined and all evidence
adduced by the defence.
88. Adoption of Specimen Format and
Permissible Deviations
88.1. The specimen charts provided herein shall
ordinarily serve as the standard format to be followed
by trial Courts across the country.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 2973 of 2023
MANOJBHAI JETHABHAI
PARMAR (ROHIT) Vs STATE OF GUJARAT
Author: Mehta, J.
Citation: 2025 INSC 1433.
Dated: DECEMBER 15, 2025.
Print PageThe trial Courts are required to decide this issue every now and then. So I deem it fit to lay down certain guidelines about approach of the Court, while dealing with this issue. {Para 94}
• Guidelines
95. If victim has not supported, then first ascertain :-
a) if she has not at all supported or
b) partly supported,
c) If partly supported then find out:-
(i) facts supported and more importantly the evidentiary value.
d) Find out corroborative materials.
e) then assess, its evidentiary value,
f) then consider together, the portion supported plus the corroborative materials.
g) then come to conclusion about the guilt.
h) The presumption can be resorted only when foundational facts are proved and not otherwise.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Criminal Appeal No. 990 of 2019
Decided On: 09.05.2024
Deelip Tatoba Raje Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
S.M. Modak, J.
Citation: MANU/MH/3173/2024.
Read full Judgment here: Click here.
Print PageJUDGMENT
13. When a Court deals with an appeal against an order of conviction, the judgment must contain (i) a concise statement of the facts of the case, (ii) the nature of the evidence adduced by the prosecution and the defence, if any, (iii) the submissions made by the parties, (iv) the analysis based on the reappreciation of evidence, and (v) the reasons for either confirming the guilt of the Accused or for acquitting the Accused. The appellate court must scan through the evidence, both oral and documentary, and reappreciate it. After reappreciating the evidence, the appellate court must record reasons for either accepting the evidence of the prosecution or for disbelieving the evidence of the prosecution. The Court must record reasons for deciding whether the charges against the Accused have been proved. In a given case, if the conviction is confirmed, the Court will have to deal with the legality and adequacy of the sentence. In such a case, there must be a finding recorded on the legality and adequacy of the sentence with reasons. The ultimate object of writing a judgment is to ensure that the parties before the Court know why the case is decided in their favour or against them. Therefore, judgment must be in a simple language. The conclusions recorded by the Court in the judgment on legal or factual issues must be supported by cogent reasons.
14. No doubt, the Court can always comment upon the conduct of the parties. However, the findings regarding the conduct of the parties must be confined only to such conduct which has a bearing on the decision-making. A judgment of the Court cannot contain the Judge's personal opinions on various subjects. Similarly, advisory jurisdiction cannot be exercised by the Court by incorporating advice to the parties or advice in general. The Judge has to decide a case and not preach. The judgment cannot contain irrelevant and unnecessary material. A judgment must be in simple language and should not be verbose. Brevity is the hallmark of quality judgment. We must remember that judgment is neither a thesis nor a piece of literature. However, we find that the impugned judgment contains personal opinion of the Judges advice to the younger generation and advice to the legislature.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 3 of 2023 and Criminal Appeal No. 1451 of 2024
Decided On: 20.08.2024
In Re: Right to Privacy of Adolescents
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
Author: Abhay Shreeniwas Oka, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/0904/2024.
Print PageQ 1:- Whether civil court can grant injunction even if issue of tenancy is referred to tenancy court?
Wigmore has laid down the following principle in dealing with the statement of a witness who dies before his cross-examination :-
" BUT, where the death or illness prevents cross-examination under such circumstances that no responsibility of any sort can be attributed to either the witness or his party, it seems a harsh measure to strike out all that has been obtained on the direct examination. Principle requires in strictness nothing less. But the true solution would be to avoid any inflexible rule, and to leave it to the trial Judge, to admit the direct examination so far as the loss of cross-examination can be shown to him to be not in that instance a. material loss. Courts differ in their treatment of this difficult situation; except that, by general concession, a cross-examination begun, but unfinished, suffices if its purposes have been substantially accomplished." (see page 765 of Woodroffe and Ameer Ali's Law of Evidence, 11th Edition.) {Para 11}
(12) I have given the matter my consideration and am of the view that the statement of a witness in examination-in-chief, which was admissible at the time it was recorded, cannot become inadmissible by reason of the subsequent death of the witness before cross-examination. The absence of cross-examination would undoubtedly affect the value and weight to be attached to the statement of the witness, but it would not render the statement inadmissible or result in its effacement. So far as the question is concerned as to what weight should be attached to such statement made in examination-in-chief the Court has to keep in view the facts and circumstances of each individual case. Some of the factors which may be borne in mind are the nature of the testimony, its probative value, the status of the witness, his relationship or connection with the parties to the case, a likely animus which may colour his statement and any other factor touching the credibility of the witness which may emerge on the record. Regard must also be had to the fact that the witness has not been subjected to cross-examination. The Court should see whether there are indications on the record that as a result of cross-examination his testimony was likely to be seriously shaken or his good faith or credit to be successfully impeached. The Court may also adopt a rule not to act upon such testimony unless it is materially corroborated or is supported by the surrounding circumstances. If after applying that rule of caution, the Court decides to rely upon the statement of a witness who was examined in chief, but who died before cross-examination, the decision of the Court in this respect would not suffer from any infirmity.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Regular Second Appeal No. 28 of 1962
Decided On: 08.07.1969
Krishan Dayal Vs. Chandu Ram
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
H.R. Khanna, J.
Citation: MANU/DE/0078/1969.
Print PageWe have seen the three decisions to which the learned Judge has made reference and they undoubtedly support his conclusion. This decision was followed in Emperor v. Abasali Yusufalli MANU/NA/0039/1935 : A.I.R. 1935 Nag. 139 and also in Mehi Singh v. Mangal Khandu I.L.R. 39 Cal. 157; Emperor v. Muhammad Yakub Ali I.L.R. 45 All. 594; and Maung E Maung v. The King A.I.R. 1940 Rang.113. In in re Tirumal RajuA.I.R. 1947 Mad. 868 it has been held that an appellate court is not competent to impose a punishment higher than the maximum that could have been imposed by the trial court. It seems to us that these cases lay down the correct law. An appeal court is after all "a court of error", that is, a court established for correcting an error. If, while purporting to correct an error, the court were to do something which was beyond the competence of the trying court, how could it be said to be correcting an error of the trying court ? No case has been cited before us in which it has been held that the High Court, after setting aside an acquittal, can pass a sentence beyond the competence of the trying court. Therefore, both on principle and authority it is clear that the power of the appellate court to pass a sentence must be measured by the power of the court from whose judgment an appeal has been brought before it. The High Court was thus in error in sentencing the appellant to undergo imprisonment in respect of the offence under s. 392 for a period exceeding two years. Accordingly we allow the appeal partially and reduce the sentence of imprisonment in respect of the offence under s. 392 from rigorous imprisonment of four years to a period of two years. Subject to this modification we dismiss the appeal. {Para 8}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 156 of 1963
Decided On: 30.11.1965
Jagat Bahadur Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.K. Sarkar, J.R. Mudholkar and R.S. Bachawat, JJ.
Author: J.R. Mudholkar, J.
Citation: 1965 INSC 271, MANU/SC/0096/1965,AIR 1966 SC 945.
Print Page
As limited notice was issued in both the SLPs, we heard arguments on the point of rigorous imprisonment while convicting a person Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Mr. A. Sirajudeen, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner in SLP (Crl.) No. 6220 of 2018, submitted that the issue is no more res integra as it is covered by a judgment of this Court in Naib Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors. MANU/SC/0125/1983 : (1983) 2 SCC 454. {Para 6}
8. In Naib Singh (supra) the Petitioner was originally sentenced to death for committing an offence of murder Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Later, the death sentence was commuted to imprisonment for life by the Government of Punjab. After having undergone sentence of 22 years, Naib Singh filed a Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging his continued detention. One of the points argued by the Petitioner relates to sentence of imprisonment for life not to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life. By taking into account the earlier judgments of this Court in Pandit Kishori Lal v. King Emperor MANU/PR/0017/1944 : AIR 1945 PC 64 and Gopal Vinayak Godse v. State of Maharashtra MANU/SC/0156/1961 : 1961 3 SCR 440, this Court in Naib Singh's case held that the sentence of imprisonment for life has to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life. The law laid down by this Court in Naib Singh's was followed by this Court in three judgments Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal v. State of Gujarat, Sat Pal alias Sadhu v. State of Haryana MANU/SC/0531/1992 : (1992) 4 SCC 172 and Mohd. Munna v. Union of India MANU/SC/0566/2005 : (2005) 7 SCC 417.
9. In view of the authoritative pronouncements of this Court on the issues that arise for consideration in these SLPs, there is no need to re-examine the limited point for which notice was issued.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SLP (Crl.) Nos. 6220 and 7110 of 2018
Decided On: 14.09.2021
Md. Alfaz Ali Vs. The State of Assam
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
L. Nageswara Rao and B.R. Gavai, JJ.
Citation: 2021 INSC 480, MANU/SC/0640/2021, (2021) 19 SCC 751.
Print PageSome contradictions were sought to be pointed out in the statement as given in the First Information Report and in the evidence of the witness P.W. 11 but we do not think it is open to the learned advocate to comment upon it because none of those contradictions have been put to the witness at the time of his giving evidence. According to the F.I.R. it would appear that Indradeo Singh accompanied by Chait Ahir, Vikrama Singh, Musan Pandey, Billar Ahir and Mongru Ahir resident of the village went there and forbade the accused persons from cutting paddy crops from his field, but the accused persons did not listen to them. Indradeo Singh made many entreats requested them not to commit such high handedness nor did he say Indradeo Singh fell in the field of Sumer Singh. In the first place it may be noticed that F.I.R. is not a substantial piece of evidence. It is an information of a cognizable offence given under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code and if there is any statement made therein it can only be used for the purposes of contradicting and discrediting a witness under Section 145 of the Evidence Act. In the second place the statement given by the informant need not necessarily be an eye witness account of what he has actually seen. There were others who had gone along with him who could have furnished him with information as to what transpired in so far as it was in their knowledge. If these aspects had been put to P.W. 11, he would have had an opportunity of explaining the statement made in the F.I.R. but since that opportunity was not given, any comment based on the statement given by P.W. 11 in the F.I.R. would be without effect.
{Para 7}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 279 of 1968
Decided On: 21.04.1972
Nanhku Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
K.K. Mathew and P. Jaganmohan Reddy, JJ.
Author: P. Jaganmohan Reddy, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/0185/1972.
Print PageBefore we part with the case, we may observe a common error creeping in many of the judgments including the present one. No distinction is made while using the words 'informant' and 'complainant'. In many of the judgments, the person giving the report under Section 154 of the Code is described as the 'complainant' or the 'de facto complainant' instead of 'informant', assuming that the State is the complainant. These are not words of literature. In a case registered under Section 154 of the Code, the State is the prosecutor and the person whose information is the cause for lodging the report is the informant. This is obvious from Sub-section (2) of Section 154 of the Code which, inter alia, provides for giving a copy of the information to the 'informant' and not to the 'complainant'. However the complainant is the person who lodges the complaint. The word 'complaint' is defined under Section 2(d) of the Code to mean any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate and the person who makes the allegation is the complainant, which would be evident from Section 200 of the Code, which provides for examination of the complainant in a complaint-case. Therefore, these words carry different meanings and are not interchangeable. In short, the person giving information, which leads to lodging of the report under Section 154 of the Code is the informant and the person who files the complaint is the complainant. {Para 12}
Words and phrases - Words "informant" and "complainant"--Carry different meanings and are not interchangeable.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 1948 of 2013
Decided On: 19.11.2013
Ganesha Vs. Sharanappa and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
C.K. Prasad and Kurian Joseph, JJ.
Author: C.K. Prasad, J.
Citation: 2013 INSC 762,MANU/SC/1185/2013.
Print PageADDITIONAL DIRECTIONS:
53. The Impugned Judgment annexed in the paperbook is
a certified copy obtained from the High Court.
However, it is not numbered paragraph-wise.
54. In Shakuntala Shukla v State of Uttar Pradesh,
2021 SCC OnLine SC 672, this Court had the occasion
to observe:
“35. … A judgement should be coherent, systematic and
logically organised …”.
55. Likewise, in State Bank of India v Ajay Kumar
Sood, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1067, this Court opined:
“21. It is also useful for all judgments to carry
paragraph numbers as it allows for ease of referenc e
and enhances the structure, improving the readability
and accessibility of the judgments . A Table of Contents
in a longer version assists access to the reader.”
(emphasis supplied)
56. It is desirable that all Courts and Tribunals, as
a matter of practice, number paragraphs in all Orders
and Judgments in seriatim, factoring in the judgments
afore-extracted.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 1890 OF 201 4
B. S. HARI COMMANDANT Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Author: AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH,J.
Dated: APRIL 13, 2023.
Print PageThe purpose of judicial writing is not to confuse or confound the reader behind the veneer of complex language. The judge must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily meant for those whose cases are decided by judges. Judgments of the High Courts and the Supreme Court also serve as precedents to guide future benches. A judgment must make sense to those whose lives and affairs are affected by the outcome of the case.A judgment should be coherent, systematic and logically organised. It should enable the reader to trace the fact to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles. It is pertinent to examine the important elements in a judgment in order to fully understand the art of reading a judgment.
A second small change worth considering would be for more judges to give better guidance to the structure and contents of their longer Judgments. Some judges already provide a clear framework, sometimes with a table of contents, a roadmap, at the beginning, and often with appropriate headings, signposts, throughout the Judgment. Kimble's study confirms that this is not just a good discipline but it is what the legal professional readers want, and, if it is what lawyers want, it is a fortiori what non-lawyers will want. A clear structure aids accessibility.
20. It is also useful for all judgments to carry paragraph numbers as it allows for ease of reference and enhances the structure, improving the readability and accessibility of the judgments. A Table of Contents in a longer version assists access to the reader.
21. On the note of accessibility, the importance of making judgments accessible to persons from all Sections of society, especially persons with disability needs emphasis. All judicial institutions must ensure that the judgments and orders being published by them do not carry improperly placed watermarks as they end up making the documents inaccessible for persons with visual disability who use screen readers to access them. On the same note, courts and tribunals must also ensure that the version of the judgments and orders uploaded is accessible and signed using digital signatures. They should not be scanned versions of printed copies. The practice of printing and scanning documents is a futile and time-consuming process which does not serve any purpose. The practice should be eradicated from the litigation process as it tends to make documents as well as the process inaccessible for an entire gamut of citizens.
22. In terms of structuring judgments, it would be beneficial for courts to structure them in a manner such that the 'Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion' are easily identifiable. The well-renowned 'IRAC method generally followed for analyzing cases and structuring submissions can also benefit judgments when it is complemented by recording the facts and submissions.
23. The 'Issue' refers to the question of law that the court is deciding. A court may be dealing with multiple issues in the same judgment. Identifying these issues clearly helps structure the judgment and provides clarity for the reader on the specific issue of law being decided in a particular segment of a judgment. The 'Rule' refers to the portion of the judgment which distils the submissions of counsel on the applicable law and doctrine for the issue identified. This Rule is applied to the facts of the case in which the issue has arisen. The analysis recording the reasoning of a court forms the 'Application' section.
24. Finally, it is always useful for a court to summarize and lay out the 'Conclusion' on the basis of its determination of the application of the Rule to the issue along with the decision vis-à-vis the specific facts. This allows stakeholders, especially members of the bar as well as judges relying upon the case in the future, to concisely understand the holding of the case.
25. Justice M.M. Corbett, Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of South Africa, in a lecture at an orientation course for new judges,9 recommended a similar structure which facilitates orderliness and produces a logical, flowing judgment:
(a) An introductory section;
(b) Setting out of the facts:
(c) The law and the issues;
(d) Applying the law to the facts;
(e) Determining the relief (including order for costs); and
(f) Finally, the order of the Court.
This has also been captured by Justice Corbett,10 in the following extract:
27. For lucidity should be the prime aim of any judgment-writer. At the same time, certain aspects of style have a bearing on lucidity. In this connection, my advice (for what it is worth) is to keep your language and your sentence construction simple. Write in short sentences and do not try to pack too many ideas into a single sentence. Particularly in setting out facts, try to maintain a simple, straightforward flow to your narrative. Try to avoid the repetition of words or phrases and observe the normal Rules of grammar. A well-known exponent of simple language and the simple sentence was Lord Denning.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Appeal No. 5305 of 2022
Decided On: 16.08.2022
State Bank of India and Ors. Vs. Ajay Kumar Sood
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.
Author: Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/1040/2022
Print PageEven otherwise, it is to be noted that there is no clarity on the actual market price and while passing the final order, the High Court has not stated the exact market value and/or the amount of compensation to be paid. There is no actual assessment and/or determination of market value and/or the compensation. How on such a vague order, a decree can be drawn and how such an order is executable? The judgment must have a clarity on the exact relief that is granted by the Court so that it may not create further complication and/or difficulty in the execution. Every litigant must know what actual relief he has received from the Court. But the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court lacks total clarity. {Para 5}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
M.R. SHAH; B.V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.
MARCH 10, 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1761 & 1762 OF 2022
Pramina Devi (Dead) Thr. LRs. VsState of Jharkhand
Author: M.R. SHAH, J.
Print Page1) Master the facts of the case
(a) Bail conditions should not mandate, require or permit contact between the
accused and the victim. Such conditions should seek to protect the complainant from
any further harassment by the accused;
(b) Where circumstances exist for the court to believe that there might be a
potential threat of harassment of the victim, or upon apprehension expressed, after
calling for reports from the police, the nature of protection shall be separately
considered and appropriate order made, in addition to a direction to the accused not to
make any contact with the victim;
(c) In all cases where bail is granted, the complainant should immediately be
informed that the accused has been granted bail and copy of the bail order made over to him/her within two days;
(d) Bail conditions and orders should avoid reflecting stereotypical or patriarchal notions about women and their place in society, and must strictly be in accordance with the requirements of the Cr. PC. In other words, discussion about the dress, behavior, or past “conduct” or “morals” of the prosecutrix, should not enter the verdict granting bail;
(e) The courts while adjudicating cases involving gender related crimes, should not suggest or entertain any notions (or encourage any steps) towards compromises between the prosecutrix and the accused to get married, suggest or mandatemediation between the accused and the survivor, or any form of compromise as it is beyond their powers and jurisdiction;
(f) Sensitivity should be displayed at all times by judges, who should ensure that there is no traumatization of the prosecutrix, during the proceedings, or anything said during the arguments, and
(g) Judges especially should not use any words, spoken or written, that would undermine or shake the confidence of the survivor in the fairness or impartiality of the court. {Para 44}
45. Further, courts should desist from expressing any stereotype opinion, in words spoken during proceedings, or in the course of a judicial order, to the effect that (i) women are physically weak and need protection; (ii) women are incapable of or cannot take decisions on their own; (iii) men are the “head” of the household and should take all the decisions relating to family; (iv) women should be submissive and obedient according to our culture; (v) “good” women are sexually chaste; (vi) motherhood is the duty and role of every woman, and assumptions to the effect that she wants to be a mother; (vii) women should be the ones in charge of their children,
their upbringing and care; (viii) being alone at night or wearing certain clothes make women responsible for being attacked; (ix) a woman consuming alcohol, smoking, etc. may justify unwelcome advances by men or “has asked for it”; (x) women are emotional and often overreact or dramatize events, hence it is necessary to corroborate their testimony; (xi) testimonial evidence provided by women who are sexually active may be suspected when assessing “consent” in sexual offence cases;and (xii) lack of evidence of physical harm in sexual offence case leads to an inference of consent by the woman.
46. As far as the training and sensitization of judges and lawyers, including public
prosecutors goes, this court hereby mandates that a module on gender sensitization be
included, as part of the foundational training of every judge. This module must aim at
imparting techniques for judges to be more sensitive in hearing and deciding cases of
sexual assault, and eliminating entrenched social bias, especially misogyny. The
module should also emphasize the prominent role that judges are expected to play in
society, as role models and thought leaders, in promoting equality and ensuring
fairness, safety and security to all women who allege the perpetration of sexual
offences against them. Equally, the use of language and appropriate words and
phrases should be emphasized as part of this training.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION)
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 329 OF 2021
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 2531 OF 2021]
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRL.) DIARY NO. 20318 OF 2020)
APARNA BHAT & ORS. Vs STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Author: S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
Dated:March 18, 2021.
Citation: 2021 SCC OnLine SC 230,2021 ALL SCR (Cri) 732
Print PageThe report was submitted by the Registrar
(Judicial) stating that the order was pronounced on
21.01.2020 being only the operative portion, and the
reasons were received by the Registry only on 09.10.2020
after almost nine months. It was uploaded on the same
date.
9. On the aforesaid short ground, without even looking
at any other aspect, we issued notice returnable for
today and stayed the operation of the impugned order.
10. We must note with regret that the counsel extended
through various judicial pronouncements including the
one referred to aforesaid appear to have been ignored,
more importantly where oral orders are pronounced. In
case of such orders, it is expected that they are either
dictated in the Court or at least must follow
immediately thereafter, to facilitate any aggrieved
party to seek redressal from the higher Court. The
delay in delivery of judgments has been observed to be a
violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India in
Anil Rai’s case (supra) and as stated aforesaid, the
problem gets aggravated when the operative portion is
made available early and the reasons follow much later.
11. It cannot be countenanced that between the date of
the operative portion of the order and the reasons
disclosed, there is a hiatus period of nine months!
This is much more than what has been observed to be the
maximum time period for even pronouncement of reserved
judgment as per Anil Rai’s case (supra).
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL N O.3564/2020
BALAJI BALIRAM MUPADE Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Author: SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
Dated: OCTOBER 29, 2020.
Print Page