The Supreme Court agreed to examine whether the oral pronouncement of a court’s decision is sufficient to seal the fate of a case, or if a final, written signed judgment or order by the judge(s) is an indispensable requirement. A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Manmohan added that it will lay down the law on the timeline for courts to upload reasoned, written orders after such oral pronouncement.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India set to decide if a court’s oral ruling is enough to conclude a case or if a final, written, and signed judgment is mandatory. This decision follows debates about the timeliness and validity of oral pronouncements in judicial proceedings.
A Bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Manmohan emphasized the need to establish clear guidelines on this issue on Wednesday (Dec 18).
Justice Oka stated,
“We have to lay down some law here. Whether such oral pronouncement saying ‘petition disposed of’ would actually mean that petition is disposed of and also the timeline for Court to upload a reasoned order after such oral pronouncement.”
The Bench also referred to a recent case highlighting the importance of courts uploading judgments and orders on their websites promptly. In one instance, the Gujarat High Court took a year to upload a judgment that had been orally pronounced in open court, raising concerns over judicial efficiency.
The Bench explored whether courts can recall judgments pronounced in open court.
Justice Oka remarked,
“There has to be a law laid down. Particularly one thing could be (whether) judges can recall but after hearing the parties.”
This issue arose after the Madras High Court‘s Division Bench reversed its earlier decision to quash a money laundering case against retired IPS officer Jaffer Sait.
- August 21, 2023: The Madras High Court orally quashed a money laundering case against Jaffer Sait.
- August 23, 2023: The same Bench suo motu recalled its decision, citing concerns raised by another Bench about money laundering cases being dismissed prematurely.
- September 6, 2023: The Supreme Court directed the Madras High Court’s Registrar General to submit a detailed report on the handling of the case.
- October 4, 2023: The Supreme Court stayed the High Court’s recall order.
The case involves allegations that Sait illegally acquired land from the Tamil Nadu Housing Board in 2011. Although a corruption case against him was quashed by the Madras High Court in 2019, he sought relief from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on related charges in 2023.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court observed discrepancies in the handling of the case.
Justice Oka noted,
“Today, the peculiar position is that your (Sait) petition for quashing was allowed but without reasons – since they pronounced a single line order. (High Court) said that reasons will be given later, which was later recalled. We now come on square one.”
Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, representing Sait, argued that even oral rulings qualify as judgments. The Court responded by emphasizing the need for legal clarity, stating,
“We permit the parties to place additional judgments on this aspect and brief submissions on the issue. List on Wednesday, January 8. Interim relief to continue as already granted to the appellant.”
The Supreme Court will hear the case again on January 8, 2025, to decide whether oral pronouncements are sufficient or if a written order is essential.
Advocate Zoheb Hossain appeared for the ED in this matter.
CASE TITLE:
MS Jaffar Sait v. Directorate of Enforcement.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Oral Judgments
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
