The Supreme Court has directed all trial courts to use structured charts for witnesses, documents and evidence in criminal judgments. The move aims to improve clarity, readability and faster review of cases by appellate courts.
New Delhi: In an important move to make criminal court judgments easier to read and understand, the Supreme Court on Monday issued detailed directions to trial courts across the country.
The top court said criminal judgments must follow a more structured and uniform format so that judges, lawyers and appellate courts can clearly understand the evidence and findings without confusion.
A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta said that all trial courts dealing with criminal cases must include clear tabulated charts at the end of their judgments.
These charts should briefly summarise key details such as the list of witnesses examined during the trial, documents that were produced and exhibited, and material objects that were placed on record.
The Supreme Court directed that these charts should be added either as an appendix or as the concluding part of the judgment.
The format must be clear, properly structured and easy to understand so that anyone reading the judgment can quickly refer to important details without going through lengthy pages.
Explaining the need for these directions, the Bench said,
“We are of the considered view that a more structured and uniform practice must be adopted to enhance the legibility of criminal judgments. Accordingly, to ensure a systematic presentation of evidence that enables efficient appreciation of the record, we issue the following directions to all trial courts across the country.”
The court further clarified that the purpose of these directions is to bring consistency in how evidence is recorded and presented in judgments. It said,
“These directions aim to institutionalise a standardised format for cataloguing witnesses, documentary evidence and material objects. This will serve to facilitate better comprehension and immediate reference for all stakeholders, including the appellate courts.”
The Supreme Court specifically stated that every criminal judgment must contain a witness chart. This chart should mention the serial number of each witness, the name of the witness and a short description explaining whether the witness is an informant, eyewitness, doctor or any other relevant category.
The Bench emphasised that the description should be brief but meaningful. It said,
“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 minimise ambiguity.”
Apart from witnesses, the court also directed trial courts to prepare a separate chart for documents that are exhibited during the trial.
This chart should clearly mention the exhibit number, a short description of the document and the name of the witness who proved or attested the document in court.
The Supreme Court recognised that some criminal cases are extremely complex and involve a large number of witnesses and documents.
It said,
“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.”
To deal with such situations, the Bench allowed flexibility to trial courts. It stated,
“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.”
These directions were issued by the Supreme Court while hearing a case in which it set aside the conviction of a man who was accused of sexually assaulting a four-year-old girl. While examining the record, the court found serious gaps in the prosecution case.
The Bench pointed out that the First Information Report (FIR) itself was extremely weak. The court noted that even though the informant claimed to have full knowledge of the incident, the FIR did not mention basic and crucial details.
According to the court, the FIR was completely lacking essential information such as the names of the accused and the alleged witnesses.
By issuing these directions, the Supreme Court has made it clear that clarity, structure and proper documentation are essential for fair criminal trials.
The ruling is expected to improve the quality of criminal judgments and help higher courts review cases more effectively, while also reducing confusion and ambiguity in the justice delivery system.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Anti-Dowry Laws
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
