Emperor v. Pragmadho Singh And Others

Sulaiman, C.J:— The office has brought it to my notice that there are certain judgments in criminal cases delivered by the late Mr. Justice Banerji in open court and taken down by his judgment-writer and which, owing to li is death, remained unsigned after having been faired out. Notes were made by the Bench reader of he disposal of the cases, and in some of these the learned Judge actually signed the release warrants. It is quite clear that section 366 of the Criminal Procedure Code which requires that the judgment of every trial in any criminal court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced. In open court and section 367 which provides that the written judgment should be dated and signed by the presiding officer in open court, do not apply to a High Court. Chapter 26 applies to judgments delivered by criminal courts of original jurisdiction. Section 424 of the Act makes the rules contained in Chapter 26 as to the judgments of criminal courts of original jurisdiction applicable to judgments of any appellate court “other thin a High Court”. There is therefore no provision which requires that the High Court, after pronouncing a judgment in open court, should date and sign the same. As a matter of fact all that section 425 requires is that the judgment should be certified to the court below.

The criminal appeals which were disposed of by the late Mr. Justice Banerji by the delivery of judgments in open court and which were taken down by his judgment-writer must be deemed to have been finally disposed of by him the omission to initial the fair copy of the judgements is in no way a serious defect.

For the purpose of certifying the judgments to the courts below it will be convenient for them to be put up before the Chief Justice for initialling them so that they may be certified.