The Supreme Court has asked Courts and tribunals to avoid uploading on their websites scanned versions of printed copies of their judgments [State Bank of India and anr vs Ajay Kumar Sood]..A Bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna said that judicial institutions should ensure that judgment copies uploaded are accessible and signed using digital signatures. "Courts and tribunals must also ensure that the version of the judgments and orders uploaded is accessible and signed using digital signatures. They should not be scanned versions of printed copies," the Court said.The practice of printing and scanning documents is a futile and time-consuming process which does not serve any purpose, the Court added."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," the judgment said..The top court was hearing an appeal against a 2020 Himachal Pradesh High Court judgment that had upheld a 2019 Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) order.The CGIT had modified the disciplinary action against the respondent from dismissal to compulsory retirement. The Bench had in March 2021 issued notice in the matter as it held that a serious act of misconduct stood established from the evidentiary findings in the CGIT order. However, finding the 18-page High Court judgment upholding the CGIT order incomprehensible, the top court had ordered that no coercive action be taken against the respondent until final disposal of the appeal. The apex court had also gone on to say that judgments written in such incomprehensible language do disservice to the cause of ensuring accessible and understandable justice to citizens..Subsequently, the matter was heard and final judgment delivered on August 16 this year, remanding the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration.The Court stated that it was constrained to do so, as it was left with no other option. "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 ... The High Court must appreciate the delay and expense occasioned as a consequence and must make an effort to record reasons which are understood by all stake-holders" the bench reasoned. The Court said that a litigant would find it even tougher than the court to comprehend such orders. "Untrained in the law, the litigant is confronted with language which is not heard, written or spoken in contemporary expression. Language of the kind in a judgment defeats the purpose of judicial writing. Judgment writing of the genre before us in appeal detracts from the efficacy of the judicial process. 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," the apex court said. Judgments of the higher judiciary serve as precedents to guide future benches and it must make sense to those whose lives and affairs are affected by its outcome, the Court emphasised.Therefore, judicial processes are predicated on the trust the written word generates, the judges observed. The top court also said in this regard that the work of a judge cannot be reduced to a statistic about the disposal of a case."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.".Tips for judgment writing.While the Bench noted that it was unfortunate that it had to set aside the High Court's order due to its incoherence, it proceeded to lay out some guidelines on judgment writing. The Bench began by emphasising that a judgment culminates in a conclusion, and the content of the former represents the basis for the latter. "A judgment is hence a manifestation of reason. The reasons provide the basis of the view which the decision maker has espoused, of the balances which have been drawn. That is why reasons are crucial to the legitimacy of a judge's work. They provide an insight into judicial analysis, explaining to the reader why what is written has been written. The reasons, as much as the final conclusion, are open to scrutiny," the apex court held.Next, the Bench touched upon the importance of brevity in judgments which decide complex questions of law and of facts. "Brevity is an unwitting victim of an overburdened judiciary. It is also becoming a victim of the cutcopy-paste convenience afforded by software developers. This Court has been providing headings and sub-headings to assist the reader in providing a structured sequence."The Court further highlighted the importance of coherent formatting, structuring and referencing to make the structure of the content in judgments clearer. "It is also useful for all judgments to carry paragraph numbers as it allows for ease of reference and enhances the structure, improving the readability and accessibility of the judgments. A Table of Contents in a longer version assists access to the reader ... In terms of structuring judgments, it would be beneficial for courts to structure them in a manner such that the 'Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion' are easily identifiable ... This allows stakeholders, especially members of the bar as well as judges relying upon the case in the future, to concisely understand the holding of the case."However, the top court made it clear that individual judges can indeed have different ways of writing judgments, and continue to have variations in their styles of expression."The expression of a judge is an unfolding of the recesses of the mind. However, while recesses of the mind may be inscrutable, the reasoning in judgment cannot be. While judges may have their own style of judgment writing, they must ensure lucidity in writing across these styles," the Bench stated..Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves with advocates Radhika Gautam, Anjali Dubey, and Hetvi represented the respondent. Advocates Sanjay Kapur, Subhra Kapur, Megha Karnwal, Arjun Bhatia, Aashish Kumar, and Akshata Joshi represented the petitioners..The Himachal Pradesh High Court has come under fire from the Supreme Court earlier too for similar reasons.In April 2017, a Bench of Justices Madan Lokur and Deepak Gupta had set aside a judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court because of the convoluted English used in the judgment.A Bench of Justices AM Sapre and Indu Malhotra had in December 2018 taken exception to the fact that the Himachal Pradesh High Court had devoted 60 pages to write an order for remanding a matter to the first appellate court..[Read Judgment]
