Judgment

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

Ankit Kaushik,
Assistant Professor of Law
Section 353
 353. Judgment.—(1) The judgment in every
trial in any Criminal Court or original
jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court
by the presiding officer immediately after the
termination of the trial or at some subsequent
time of which notice shall be given to the
parties or their pleaders,—
(a) by delivering the whole of the judgment; or
(b) by reading out the whole of the judgment; or
(c) by reading out the operative part of the judgment and
explaining the substance of the judgment in a language
which is understood by the accused or his pleader.
What is a judgment?
2(9)CPC, 1908 - “judgment” means the statement
given by the Judge of the grounds of a decree or
order;

“…a judgment within the meaning of these

sections is the final decision of the court intimated
to the parties and to the world at large by formal
‘pronoucement’ or ‘delivery’ in an open court. It is
a judicial act which must be performed in a
judicial way.”
- Surendra Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 1954 SC 194)
Mode of Delivery or Pronouncement
353. Judgment.—(1) The judgment in every trial in
any Criminal Court or original jurisdiction shall be pronounced
in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the
termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of which
notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders,—
(a) by delivering the whole of the judgment; or
(b) by reading out the whole of the judgment;
or
(c) by reading out the operative part of the
judgment and explaining the substance of the
judgment in a language which is understood by
the accused or his pleader.
Procedural Requirements (S. 353):
(2) Where the judgment is delivered under clause (a) of sub-section
(1), the presiding officer shall cause it to be taken down in short-hand,
sign the transcript and every page thereof as soon as it is made ready,
and write on it the date of the delivery of the judgment in open Court.

(3) Where the judgment or the operative part thereof is read out under
clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1), as the case may be, it shall
be dated and signed by the presiding officer in open Court, and if it is
not written with his own hand, every page of the judgment shall be
signed by him.

(4) Where the judgment is pronounced in the manner specified in

clause (c) of sub-section (1), the whole judgment or a copy thereof
shall be immediately made available for the perusal of the parties or
their pleaders free of cost.
 Delivery versus Reading Out
Jitender Alias Kalle v. State (Delhi High Court, 2012)
 Sub-section (2) of section 353 deals with the pronouncement of the judgment where the same is delivered in
whole. Sub-section (2) of section 353 gives a clear indication that the delivery of whole judgment that is
spoken of in clause (a) of sub-section (1) relates to "verbal delivery" inasmuch as the said sub-section (2)
makes it clear that where the judgment is delivered under clause (a) of sub-section (1), the presiding officer
shall cause it to be taken down in short-hand and to the sign the transcript on every page thereof as soon as it
is made ready, and write on it the date of the delivery of the judgment in open court. It is obvious that the
delivery of the judgment which is referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 353 cannot relate
to the "announcement of a written judgment". Because if it were so then the requirement that the
presiding officer shall so cause it to be taken down in short-hand would be redundant.

 Sub-section (3) deals with cases of pronouncement under clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) both of which
deal with reading out of the judgment. It is obvious that the reading out of the judgment can only be of
something which is written. In this case also if a judgment is written, the pronouncement would be
complete only upon reading out either the whole of the judgment or by reading out of the operative
part of the judgment and explaining the substance of the judgment in a language which is understood
by the accused or his pleader. It is also pertinent to note that if the judgment is written in the hand of the
presiding officer, then it shall be merely dated and signed in open court but if the judgment is not written
under his own hand, then there is the additional requirement of the presiding officer signing every page of the
judgment.

 Therefore, from the above it can be easily deduced that where a judgment is pronounced by delivery,
that is, through the verbal mode in open court, by the presiding officer, it has to be taken down in
shorthand, and thereafter the transcript and every page of it has to be signed as soon as it is made
ready. 
Mode of Delivery or Pronouncement
353. Judgment.—(1) The judgment in every trial in
any Criminal Court or original jurisdiction shall be pronounced
in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the
termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of
which notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders,
—
(a) by delivering the whole of the judgment; or
(b) by reading out the whole of the judgment; or
(c) by reading out the operative part of the
judgment and explaining the substance of the
judgment in a language which is understood by
the accused or his pleader.
Death of the Judge before
Pronouncement:
Surendra Singh v. State of U.P. (AIR 1954 SC 194)
 Facts: Three accused were convicted for murder by Trial Court.
Appealed to the Allahabad High Court’s Lucknow bench (J.
Kidwai and J. Bhargava). High Court reserved judgment. Before
the pronouncement of judgment, J. Bhargava was transferred to
Allahabad He dictated the judgment post his transfer, signed it
and dated it 5th January, 1953. But he passed away on 24 th
December, 1952. Judgment was still pronounced on 5 th January,
1952 upholding the conviction. Decision was appealed against.
 Held: Pronouncement of judgment must be a declaration of the
mind of the Court at the time pronouncement. Till the time the
judgment is delivered, Judged have the right to change their
mind. Therefore, even if the draft judgment has been signed
beforehand, it is nothing but a draft until it is formally delivered.
Order of the High Court was therefore set aside.
Pronouncement by a Successor in Office:
Inderchand Bishambar Dayal v. Valuation
Officer (Guwahati HC, 1992)
Issue: Whether judgment written by predecessor
could be pronounced by his successor in office?

Held: Section 353(1) makes it clear that the

presiding officer means the presiding officer
who heard the case. Matter sent back for
rehearing and pronouncement of proper
judgment.
Delay in Pronouncement
Anil Rai v. State of Bihar (2001) 7 SCC 318

Held: The words ‘at some subsequent

time’ in s. 353(1) contemplate the
pronouncement without undue delay.
Such period should not extend beyond six
weeks.
Mode of Delivery or Pronouncement
353. Judgment.—(1) The judgment in every trial in
any Criminal Court or original jurisdiction shall be pronounced
in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the
termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of which
notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders,—
(a) by delivering the whole of the judgment; or
(b) by reading out the whole of the judgment; or
(c) by reading out the operative part of the
judgment and explaining the substance of the
judgment in a language which is understood
by the accused or his pleader.
Operative Part of the Judgment
 Judgment and Operative Part Separated:

Ajay Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh (2017) 3 SCC

330
Facts: Case relating to 498A/304B, 328 and
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Judge pronounced
order stating that accused had been acquitted
vide a judgment typed and signed separately.

Held: The order declaring the result of the trial

without any judgment did not amount to a
judgment under section 353.
Procedural Requirements (S. 353):
(5) If the accused is in custody, he shall be brought up to hear the
judgment pronounced.
(6) If the accused is not in custody, he shall be required by the Court
to attend to hear the judgment pronounced, except where his
personal attendance during the trial has been dispensed with and the
sentence is one of fine only or he is acquitted:
Provided that, where there are more accused than one, and one or
more of them do not attend the Court on the date on which the
judgment is to be pronounced, the presiding officer may, in order to
avoid undue delay in the disposal of the case, pronounce the
judgment notwithstanding their absence.
(7) No judgment delivered by any Criminal Court shall be deemed to
be invalid by reason only of the absence of any party or his pleader
on the day or from the place notified for the delivery thereof, or of
any omission to serve, or defect in serving, on the parties or their
pleaders, or any of them, the notice of such day and place.
Section 354
354. Language and contents of judgment.—(1) Except as
otherwise expressly provided by this Code, every judgment
referred to in section 353,—
(a) shall be written in the language of the Court;
(b) shall contain the point or points for determination, the
decision thereon and the reasons for the decision;
(c) shall specify the offence (if any) of which, and the section
of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or other law under
which, the accused is convicted, and the punishment to which
he is sentenced;
(d) if it be a judgment of acquittal, shall state the offence of
which the accused is acquitted and direct that he be set at
liberty.
 Parts of a Judgment:
Yaqub Abdul Razak Menon v. State of Maharashtra [(2013) 13 SCC 1]
 In view of the provisions of Section 354 of the Code, it is necessary that every
judgment must contain:
(1) the points for determination;
(2) the decision thereon; and
(3) the reasons for such decision.

 Where the reasons given by the trial Court are such as cannot be supported by
the evidence on record, they are not reasons for the decision. To constitute a legal
appreciation of evidence, the judgment should be such as to indicate that the
Court has applied its mind to it. Every portion of the judgment must indicate
application of mind by the Court to the evidence on record. The reason for the
decision is an important ingredient of a judgment. Compliance with the law in this
regard should not be merely formal but substantial and real, for it is this part of the
judgment alone which enables the higher Court to appreciate the correctness of
the decision, the parties to feel that the Court has fully and impartially considered
their respective cases and the public to realise that a genuine and sincere attempt has
been made to mete out even-handed justice. Reasons form the substratum of the
decision and their factual accuracy is a guarantee that the Court has applied its
mind to the evidence in the case. Where the statement of reasons turned out to be
a mere hollow pretension of a baseless claim of application of mind by the Court,
the judgment is robbed of one of its most essential ingredients and forfeits its
Reasons of the Judgment
Prem Kaur v. State of Punjab & Ors. [(2013) 14 SCC
653]
 Fact: Father and son beat up allegedly raped the appellant.
Trial Court acquitted both on the ground that it was a
‘factual conjecture’ that a father and son would rape at the
same time. High Court dismissed the revision petition.
 Held: “Perverse Verdict.” Trial court did not decide the
case in adherence to the provision of section 354 CrPC.
The view taken by the Courts below is unreasonable and
resulted in a miscarriage of justice. It is not a judgment in
the eyes of the law. Absence of sound reasons is not a
mere irregularity, but a patent illegality.
Section 355 – Metropolitan Magistrate’s
Judgment
Instead of recording a judgment in the manner hereinbefore provided,
a Metropolitan Magistrate shall record the following particulars,
namely:—
(a) the serial number of the case;
(b) the date of the commission of the offence;
(c) the name of the complainant (if any);
(d) the name of the accused person, and his parentage and residence;
(e) the offence complained of or proved;
(f) the plea of the accused and his examination (if any);
(g) the final order;
(h) the date of such order;
(i) in all cases in which an appeal lies from the final order either under
section 373 or under sub-section (3) of section 374, a brief statement of
the reasons for the decision.