Subscribe Now! Get features like

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a judgment on how to write a judgment!

A judgment, the top court has held, must not confuse the reader using the veneer of complex language because it “speaks to the present and to the future” in settling crucial issues of law, besides providing a platform for societal dialogue.

Setting down guidelines for judicial writing, a bench, headed by Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, emphasised that each judgment is a brick in the consolidation of the fundamental precepts on which a legal order is based. Judgment writing is therefore a critical instrument “in fostering the rule of law and in curbing rule by the law,” it said.

The format laid down by the top court includes providing headings and sub-headings, paragraph numbers, a table of contents for long judgements, digital signatures, properly inserted watermarks to enable access for the visually disabled who use screen readers (which get confused by improperly placed ones) , and the “Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion” (IRAC) structure .

‘Issue’ refers to the question of law that the court is deciding; ‘Rule’ connotes the lawyers’ submissions on the pertinent issues; the reasoning of a court forms the ‘Application’; while the ‘Conclusion’ records the final decision.

While judges may have their own style of judgment writing, the bench, which also included Justice AS Bopanna said, they must ensure lucidity in writing across these styles.

“The purpose of judicial writing is not to confuse or confound the reader behind the veneer of complex language. The judge must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact, which arise for decision...While a judgment is read by those as well who have training in the law, they do not represent the entire universe of discourse,” said the bench.

Justice Chandrachud, writing the verdict for the bench, highlighted that the confidence in the judicial process is predicated on the trust which its written word generates. “If the meaning of the written word is lost in language, the ability of the adjudicator to retain the trust of the reader is severely eroded... Whether or not the writer of a judgment envisions it, the written product remains for the future, representing another incremental step in societal dialogue,” underlined the bench.

A judgment showcasing a maze of incomprehensible language defeats the purpose of judicial writing, said the court, adding that a judgment must make sense to those whose lives and affairs are affected by the outcome of the case, besides reflecting a commitment to protecting legal principle and imparting certainty to the law.

“Judgment writing is a layered exercise. In one layer, a judgment addresses the concerns and arguments of parties to a forensic contest. In another layer, a judgment addresses stake-holders beyond the conflict. It speaks to those in society who are impacted by the discourse. In the layered formulation of analysis, a judgment speaks to the present and to the future,” it held.

The court asserted the importance of judicial writing as it came across an “incomprehensible” judgment from the Himachal Pradesh high court over disciplinary proceedings against a bank employee.

Regretting that judiciary is also be becoming a victim of the “cut-copy-paste convenience afforded by software developers”, the bench said that judgments must contain reasoning .

“Courts are as much engaged in the slow yet not so silent process of bringing about a social transformation. How good or deficient they are in that quest is tested by the quality of the reasons as much as by the manner in which the judicial process is structured,” it said.

“Equally significant is the fact that a judgment speaks to the present and to the future. Judicial outcomes taken singularly or in combination have an impact upon human lives. Hence, a judgment is amenable to wider critique and scrutiny, going beyond the immediate contest in a courtroom. Citizens, researchers and journalists continuously evaluate the work of courts as public institutions committed to governance under law,” added the bench.

The court was emphatic that while recesses and expressions of the mind of a judge may be inscrutable, “the reasoning in judgment cannot be.”

At one point in the judgment, the bench emphasised that all judicial institutions must ensure that the judgments and orders being published by them do not carry improperly placed watermarks as they end up making the documents inaccessible for persons with visual disability who use screen readers to access them.

On the same note, courts and tribunals must also ensure that judgments and orders uploaded are accessible and signed using digital signatures, it added.

“They should not be scanned versions of printed copies. The practice of printing and scanning documents is a futile and time-consuming process which does not serve any purpose. The practice should be eradicated from the litigation process as it tends to make documents as well as the process inaccessible for an entire gamut of citizens,” said the court.

In the present case, the bench set aside the November 2020 high court order and sent the matter back to the high court with a request for expeditious disposal.

Utkarsh Anand is Legal Editor at the Hindustan Times. He writes on law, judiciary and governance. ...view detail

Personalise your news feed. Follow trending topics