The High Court of Delhi remanded a case back to the Additional Session Court due to the order lacking reasons.
The High Court commented that an order lacking reasons snatches the litigant's right to challenge that order.
Justice Subramonium Prasad remarked; while dealing with an order passed by the Additional Sessions Court on an appeal that emerged from a Metropolitan Magistrate Order in a case concerning Domestic Violence.
It came to light that the Appellate Court had not given any clarifications other than pronouncing that both the challenged orders were clear and also that the Metropolitan Magistrate had passed these impugned orders after taking into consideration each and every point of law.
Justice Prasad highlighted that even when an Appellate Court affirms an order of the Lower Court, it has to adjudicate on the issues which arise in the appeal and deal with all the disagreements raised by the parties.
He further noted that it was the duty of the Appellate Court to check whether the Metropolitan Magistrate had considered the claim of the petitioner on merits and also consider the reasons given by the Metropolitan Magistrate on why it rejected the claim.
The case was related to two appeals and both of them were rejected by the Additional Session Judge without giving any justification. Both the appeals were dismissed via a common judgment.
"A litigant who approaches the court with any grievance in accordance with law is entitled to know the reasons for grant or rejection of his prayer. Reasons are the soul of orders." - The Supreme Court held whilst hearing CCT v. Shukla & Bros (2010) 4 SCC 785
The Additional Sessions Judge's common judgment stated:
"Perusal of both these impugned orders is crystal clear that Id. trial court passed the impugned orders after considering each and every point of law and judgments cited. Neither of these orders suffers from any illegality, perversity nor passed the same in any arbitrary manner. Appellant tried to mingle other issues with the present one. CRL.M.C. 677/2021 & Anr. Page 3 of 7 14. With the above discussion, this court is of the view that impugned orders do not call for any interference and same are well reasoned and legally justified. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 24.07.2019 and 23.01.2020 are hereby upheld. 15. Accordingly, the above-mentioned criminal appeals are hereby dismissed as no merits are found therein.”
The High Court of Delhi took the aid of the Supreme Court Judgement in CCT vs. Shukla & Bros. where it was held that a litigant who approaches the court with a grievance has the right to know the reasons for the grant or rejection of his plea/request. The High Court allowed the petition and gave the matter back to the concerned Additional Session Judge to dispose of the case quickly. "Resultantly, the petition is allowed and the order dated 6th of February 2021 passed by the Additional Session Judge in Criminal Appeals no 19.2020 and 25.2020 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Additional Session Judge for reconsideration." -The High Court of Delhi ordered thus.
Case Title - BSR (Petitioner) vs. PSR (Respondent)
Citation - CRL.M.C. 677/2021 & Anr
Judge - Hon. Mr. Justice Subramonium Prasad
Date of Ruling - 21st of October, 2021.