Lal Khan

Confirmation of conviction with out assigning valid reasons – not valid and as such remanded to consider afresh =The High Court’s cryptic reasoning is contained in two short paragraphs. We find such disposal of a criminal appeal by the High Court particularly in a case involving charge under Section 302 of the IPC where the accused is sentenced to life imprisonment unsatisfactory. It was necessary for the High Court to consider whether the trial court’s assessment of the evidence and its opinion that the appellant must be convicted deserve to be confirmed. This exercise is necessary because the personal liberty of an accused is curtailed because of the conviction. The High Court must state its reasons why it is accepting the evidence on record. The High Court’s concurrence with the trial court’s view would be acceptable only if it is supported by reasons. In such appeals it is a court of first appeal. Reasons cannot be cryptic. By this, we do not mean that the High Court is expected to write an unduly long treatise. The judgment may be short but must reflect proper application of mind to vital evidence and important submissions which go to the root of the matter. Since this exercise is not conducted by the High Court, the appeal deserves to be remanded for a fresh hearing after setting aside the impugned order.

published in http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=40502 Page 1 1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 818 OF 2013 [ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO. 1300 OF 2013] Majjal … APPELLANT Versus State of Haryana … RESPONDENT O R D E R 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal, by grant of special leave, is … Continue reading →