We were again disturbed that almost all the daily news papers today have carried reports about the contents of this judgment, which is not even complete now. Our judgment bears the date of today. Evil is that a report on its contents was published by media yesterday and today morning. It is true that after hearing almost for long two months and bearing all the materials with much clarity in our minds, we thought of delivering our judgment with the able assistance of the counsel and in their presence forthwith. Moreover, it is the duty of the court to deliver the judgment as quickly as possible so that the parties will get the fruit of their appeal right from the mouth of the court itself at once. A pronouncement can be called a judgment only when the last word is pronounced and a date is given to that pronouncement. Until then, it is possible that certain observations or conclusions in one or two segments already dictated earlier may be modified. Moreover, in a Division Bench, it is also possible that the opinion expressed by one judge need not always be accepted by the other judge, who may form a different opinion. A judgment of a Division Bench will be conclusive only when its delivery is complete and the other judge sitting in the court concurs with the view so expressed by such delivery by the other. Until then, it cannot be termed as a Judgment. It is not proper, we feel, for the responsible media people to serve half-baked judgment to the public and in case any mistake occurred in the dictation is corrected later, it will create again a chaos as to what prompted the court to deviate from the mistaken portion, which has been published by the media as the verdict of the court.
Kerala High Court
Joseph @ Baby vs S.I. Of Police on 20 January, 2005
