The Calcutta High Court Bench Comprising Justice Bibek Chaudhuri directed the trial Courts to stop relying on Obiter dicta of those Supreme Court and High Court Cases that are non-binding in nature and read the entire judgment before application of Judgement in those cases. This direction was given while allowing an appeal filed by an accused who was found guilty by the Trial Judge for committing offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code in a case of an attempt to commit rape of an 8-year-old girl.
Background of the case
On 13th December 2011 in the evening at about 5.30 p.m. a minor girl aged about eight years was allegedly ravished by her private tutor. On the next date of the alleged incident, the mother of the victim girl lodged a written complaint against the accused in the local police station on the basis of which a case under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code was registered. The investigation culminated in filing a charge sheet by the police under the said penal provision against the accused. The offence charge-sheeted was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, after commitment, the case was committed to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Cooch Behar for trial and disposal.
During the trial, the prosecution adduced evidence in support of the charge by way of examination of the charge-sheeted witnesses. Some documents were marked exhibits on proof. The accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where he pleaded his innocence. It is also ascertained from the cross-examination of the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution that the defence took a specific plea to the effect that some amount of money was due to the mother of the victim and she lodged a false case against the accused so that she might not pay the said amount. The learned Trial Judge considered the evidence on record. Some established principles of law were enunciated and the accused was held guilty by the learned Trial Judge for committing an offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code.
Order of the Court
Justice Bibek Stressed that 'cut copy paste' judgments make a serious adverse trend in subordinate judiciary, and said that,
"I am constrained to record that nowadays this Court comes across series of judgments delivered by the Trial Court where decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts are cited without considering the fact as to whether some ratio decidendi is laid down in the said reports or not even the general observations (obiter dicta) having no binding force are relied upon and abruptly quoted in the judgments passed by the Trial Courts."
It was observed by the Court that the Judicial Officers in subordinate judiciary must understand that in cases where the Court does not lay down any general proposition of law but merely enunciates a circumstance as to the appreciation of evidence or on any other matter, such decision is applicable on fact to fact basis and not as the ratio decidendi.
The High Court considered that the statement of the victim girl had belied all evidence adduced by the prosecution in order to prove the charge. It may be noted that since the incident took place in 2011, therefore, POCSO Act, 2012 was not applicable in the instant case.
The Court allowed the appeal of the accused and held that,
"In the instant case, leaving aside the contradictions as narrated above if we accept the evidence of the mother of the victim girl and the statement made in the FIR, it is found that she saw her daughter standing in naked condition and the teacher sitting on a chair. This specific picturization of the incident does not suggest an attempt to commit rape."
At last, it was concluded that the Trial Judge had failed to appreciate the evidence on record properly and the prosecution failed to bring home the charge under Sections 376/511 of IPC.
The Court referred to the trend of the trial court relying upon non-binding observations of the Supreme Court and High Courts. The Court highlighted that it has noticed a trend that whenever a particular Section or the penal provision is noticed on the headnote of the reported judgments there is a tendency to refer such judgments by way of copying and pasting some paragraphs from the website in the body of the judgments passed by the Trial Courts.
"This trend should be stopped and the learned Judicial Officers of subordinate judiciary is advised to read the entire report before applying the same in a case in his or her hand.”
The instant appeal, therefore, was allowed on the contest, however, without cost. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence are set aside. The accused is acquitted from the charge and discharged from the bail bond, if not wanted in any other case. Learned Registrar (Judicial Service), High Court, Calcutta is requested to circulate this judgment to the learned Judicial Officers of the State through the District Judges of the respective Districts as a guideline to appreciate the reports of the Supreme Court and High Courts while referring them in a judgment of a particular case.
Case Details
Case title - Manindra Paul v. State of West Bengal
Bench: Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments