Summary
The High Court announced acquittal in murder appeals but supplied its reasoned judgment almost five months later. Applying the settled requirement of prompt reasoned decisions, the Court set aside the judgment without examining guilt and remanded for fresh disposal, preferably within six months of receipt. The accused were to remain on bail meanwhile, subject to the appeal outcome, and surrender within two weeks if their convictions were sustained.
Issues
- Whether the acquittal judgment could stand where reasons followed the operative order almost five months later.
Held
- Announcing a final result without ready reasons obstructs effective scrutiny by a higher court. The repeatedly deprecated practice of giving reasons substantially later must be discouraged; judicial discipline requires prompt reasoned pronouncement. (¶ 4-4.2)
- The High Court expressly announced only the operative acquittal order and undertook to give reasons later. The almost five-month interval before reasoned pronouncement and upload rendered the challenged judgment unsustainable under the cited authorities. The Supreme Court did not examine the evidentiary merits. (¶ 4.3-4.4)
- Fresh consideration was required, but the accused were not directed into custody pending that exercise. They were to be treated as continuing on bail, with surrender required within two weeks of the new judgment if conviction was sustained. (¶ 4.4)
Result
Appeals allowed. The impugned High Court judgment was set aside and the criminal appeals remanded for fresh decision, preferably within six months of receipt. Bail continued pending that decision, subject to its result; if conviction was sustained, surrender was required within two weeks. The record was directed to be returned forthwith.