Judge Can Seek Further Assistance Even After Reserving Judgment; Can't Be Forced To Pronounce Verdict: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that a judicial officer cannot be forced to pronounce a verdict without adequate clarity or assistance on the issue, whenever required. Emphasizing on independence of judiciary, Justice Arun Monga said that when a judge is of the mind that the judgment cannot be pronounced on the material available on record and further assistance is required for certain clarifications, it becomes a matter of being put up open for hearing in the Court. “Merely because the learned Presiding Officer had earlier reserved the judgment, he cannot now be forced to pronounce the same, even if he feels that he needs further assistance in the matter,” the Court said. Justice Monga was dealing with a plea filed by a man seeking transfer of a murder and Arms Act case against him from one Additional Sessions Judge to another for pronouncement of judgement in the matter. The FIR was registered in 2008 at Police Station Special Cell, Kalkaji, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 174A, 120B and 34 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act.Disposing of the plea, the Court noted that on May 31, the presiding judge was transferred from Patiala House Courts to Karkardooma Courts and he initially carried the case file with him to deliver the final judgment or order.It further said that the matter was heard on several dates at Karkardooma Courts, but no judgment was pronounced and the case was repeatedly adjourned.Subsequently, the file was remanded back to the transferee court at Patiala House Courts and the reason of not being able to pronounce the judgment despite earnest attempt by the transferor court presiding Judge was clearly stated- number of issues involved, enormous number of witnesses, requirement of presence of APP and IO.Denying relief to the petitioner, the Court said that no interference was warranted in the matter which must be listed before the transferee Judge, who shall proceed further in accordance with law. “In the parting, I may hasten to add that since the trial stands concluded and the judgment at one stage was reserved and kept pending for 2 months, it would be appreciated that the transferee Judge takes up the matter on priority and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible,” the Court said.Title: ABUZAR @ ANTA v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1343Click here to read order

Judge Can Seek Further Assistance Even After Reserving Judgment; Can't Be Forced To Pronounce Verdict: Delhi High Court

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags