Holding

A judgment that is incomprehensible must be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration, as clarity and accessibility are essential components of a valid judicial decision.

Summary

The Supreme Court examined a Division Bench judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court that affirmed a disciplinary dismissal of a bank employee but was written in an incomprehensible manner. The Court held that a judgment must be clear, logical and accessible to the parties and the public, and that incoherent judgments undermine the rule of law. Finding the High Court's judgment unintelligible, the Court set it aside and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, directing the High Court to rewrite its reasons in a comprehensible form. The decision also reiterated guidelines for structuring judgments using the IRAC method and emphasized accessibility for persons with disabilities. The appeal was allowed, and the writ petitions were restored for fresh adjudication.

Issues considered

The High Court's judgment is so incomprehensible that it cannot serve as a valid reasoned decision.
Whether the Supreme Court may set aside and remand a High Court judgment on the ground of lack of clarity and coherence.
Whether the principles of clear judgment writing are enforceable as a requirement for judicial decisions.

Legislation cited

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947s. 10(10), s. 10(9)

Subjects

judgment writingclarityincoherent judgmentremandIndustrial Disputes Actdisciplinary dismissalaccessibilityIRAC methodrule of lawSupreme Court of India

Judgment

[2022] 17 S.C.R. 507 507

STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER A
v.
AJAY KUMAR SOOD
(Civil Appeal No. 5305 of 2022)
AUGUST 16, 2022 B
[DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD AND
A. S. BOPANNA, JJ.]
Judgment/orders: Writing of judgments – Importance of –
Broad guidelines, explaination of – Held: Judgment writing is a
C
critical instrument in fostering the rule of law and in curbing rule
by the law – While judges may have their own style of judgment
writing, they must ensure lucidity in writing across their styles –
Purpose of judicial writing is not to confuse or confound the reader
behind the veneer of complex language – Judge must write to provide
an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact which D
arise for decision – Judgments are primarily meant for those whose
cases are decided by judges – Judgments of the High Courts and
the Supreme Court also serve as precedents to guide future benches
– Judgment is a manifestation of reason, which provide the basis of
the view which the decision maker has espoused, of the balances
E
which have been drawn – Reasons are crucial to the legitimacy of a
judge’s work – They provide an insight into judicial analysis –
Citizens, researchers and journalists continuously evaluate the work
of courts as public institutions committed to governance under law
– In terms of structuring judgments, it would be beneficial for courts
to structure them in a manner such that the ‘Issue, Rule, Application F
and Conclusion’ are easily identifiable – Well-renowned ‘IRAC’
method generally followed for analyzing cases and structuring
submissions can also benefit judgments when it is complemented by
recording the facts and submissions – On facts, impugned judgment
being incoherent and incomprehensible is set aside and remanded
G
back – Incoherent judgments have a serious impact upon the dignity
of our institutions.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The judgment of the Division Bench of the High
Court of Himachal Pradesh is incomprehensible. This Court in H
507
508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A appeal found it difficult to navigate through the maze of
incomprehensible language in the decision of the High Court. A
litigant for whom the judgment is primarily meant would be placed
in an even more difficult position. 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
B
defeats the purpose of judicial writing. Judgment writing of the
genre 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
C law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily
meant for those whose cases are decided by judges. Judgments
of the High Courts and the Supreme Court also serve as
precedents to guide future benches. A judgment must make sense
to those whose lives and affairs are affected by the outcome of
the case. While a judgment is read by those as well who have
D
training in the law, they do not represent the entire universe of
discourse. 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. [Para 10][517-
E B-F]
1.2 The case is remitted back to the High Court for
consideration afresh. The judgment of the High Court is simply
incomprehensible leaving no option than to remand the
proceedings. The High Court must appreciate the delay and
F expense occasioned as a consequence and must make an effort
to record reasons which are understood by all stake-holders. [Para
11][517-F-G]
1.3 Amidst an overburdened judicial docket, a view is
sometimes voiced that parties are concerned with the outcome
G and little else. This view proceeds on the basis that parties value
the outcome and not the reasoning which constitutes the
foundation. This view undervalues the importance of the judicial
function and of the reasons which are critical to it. The work of a
judge cannot be reduced to a statistic about the disposal of a
case. Every judgment is an incremental step towards consolidation
H
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 509
SOOD

and change. In adhering to precedent, the judgment reflects a A
commitment to protecting legal principle. This imparts certainty
to the law. Each judgment is hence a brick in the consolidation of
the fundamental precepts on which a legal order is based. But in
incremental steps a judgment addresses the need to evolve and
to transform by addressing critical issues which confront human
B
existence. 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. [Para 13][520-B-E]
1.4 A judgment culminates in a conclusion. But its content C
represents the basis for the conclusion. 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 D
analysis, explaining to the reader why what is written has been
written. The reasons, as much as the final conclusion, are open
to scrutiny. A judgment is written primarily for the parties in a
forensic contest. The scrutiny is first and foremost by the person
for whom the decision is meant - the conflicting parties before
the court. At a secondary level, reasons furnish the basis for E
challenging a judicial outcome in a higher forum. The validity of
the decision is tested by the underlying content and reasons.
But there is more. 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. F
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.
Judgment writing is hence a critical instrument in fostering the
rule of law and in curbing rule by the law. [Para 16][521-F-G; G
522-A-C]
1.5 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-
H
510 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A 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. Whether or
not the writer of a judgment envisions it, the written product
remains for the future, representing another incremental step in
societal dialogue. If a judgment does not measure up, it can be
B
critiqued and criticized. Behind the layers of reason is the vision
of the adjudicator over the values which a just society must
embody and defend. In a constitutional framework, these values
have to be grounded in the Constitution. The reasons which a
judge furnishes provides a window - an insight - into the work of
C the court in espousing these values as an integral element of the
judicial function. [Para 17][522-D-F]
1.6 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
D judgments. A Table of Contents in a longer version assists access
to the reader. [Para 20][523-C-D]
1.7 On the note of accessibility, the importance of making
judgments accessible to persons from all sections of society,
especially persons with disability needs emphasis. All judicial
E 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 the version
of the judgments and orders uploaded is accessible and signed
F using digital signatures. 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
G inaccessible for an entire gamut of citizens. [Para 21][523-D-F]
1.8 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. The well-
renowned ‘IRAC’ method generally followed for analyzing cases
H
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 511
SOOD

and structuring submissions can also benefit judgments when it A
is complemented by recording the facts and submissions. The
‘Issue’ refers to the question of law that the court is deciding. A
court may be dealing with multiple issues in the same judgment.
Identifying these issues clearly helps structure the judgment and
provides clarity for the reader on the specific issue of law being
B
decided in a particular segment of a judgment. The ‘Rule’ refers
to the portion of the judgment which distils the submissions of
counsel on the applicable law and doctrine for the issue identified.
This rule is applied to the facts of the case in which the issue has
arisen. The analysis recording the reasoning of a court forms the
‘Application’ section. Finally, it is always useful for a court to C
summarize and lay out the ‘Conclusion’ on the basis of its
determination of the application of the rule to the issue along
with the decision vis-à-vis the specific facts. This allows
stakeholders, especially members of the bar as well as judges
relying upon the case in the future, to concisely understand the
D
holding of the case. [Para 22-24][523-G; 524-A-D]
1.10 The impugned judgment is set aside and is remanded
due to its incoherence. Incoherent judgments have a serious
impact upon the dignity of our institutions. [Para 26][524-F-G]
1.11 While some broad guidelines have been laid down, E
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 F
lucidity in writing across these styles. [Para 27][524-G; 525-A-
B]
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Himachal Aluminium and
Conductors Civil Appeal No. 5032 of 2022; Sarla Sood
v. Pawan Kumar Sharma Special Leave to Appeal (C) G
No. 7768-7769 of 2017; Shakuntala Shukla v. State of
Uttar Pradesh (2021) SCC OnLine SC 672; Shakuntala

H
512 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2021 AIR 4384:[2021]
10 SCALE 298 – referred to.
Lord Burrows, Justice of the Supreme Court of the
United Kingdom, Judgment-Writing: A Personal
Perspective, Annual Conference of Judges of the
B Superior Courts in Ireland, 20 May 2021; Justice
Daphne Barak-Erez, Writing Law: Reflections on
Judicial Decisions and Academic Scholarship, (2015)
41- 1 QUEEN’S LAW JOURNAL 255; Justice M.M.
Corbett, Writing a Judgment - Address at the First
Orientation Course for New Judges, (1998) 115
C SOUTH AFRICAN LAW JOURNAL 116; Justice
Michael Kirby, On the Writing of Judgments, (1990)
64 AUSTRALIAN LAW JOURNAL 69; Lord
Neuberger, No Judgment – No Justice, First Annual
British and Irish Legal Information Institute (BAILII)
D Lecture (20 November 2012) – referred to.
Case Law Reference
2021 AIR 4384 referred to Para 12
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5305
of 2022.
E From the Judgment and Order dated 27.11.2020 of the High Court
of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Writ Petition No. 3597 of 2020.
Sanjay Kapur, Ms. Subhra Kapur, Ms. Megha Karnwal, Arjun
Bhatia, Aashish Kumar, Ms. Akshata Joshi, Advs. for the Appellants.
Colin Gonsalves, Sr. Adv., Ms. Radhika Gautam, Ms. Anjali Dubey,
F Ms. Hetvi, Advs. for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises from a judgment dated 27 November 2020
G of a Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. The High
Court affirmed the order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal 1
dated 09 July 2019.
3. In 2013, the appellant issued a charge sheet to the respondent
in a disciplinary enquiry on a charge of gross misconduct. The respondent
1
H “CGIT”
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 513
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

was charged with (i) gross misconduct including disrupting the functioning A
of the branch of the bank and misbehavior with the branch manager; (ii)
use of abusive language and threatening the branch manager; (iii)
organizing demonstrations without prior notice; (iv) disrupting smooth
functioning by preventing other employees from carrying out their
functions; (v) deliberately flouting systems and procedures with the
B
intention to undermine the branch manager’s authority and increasing
the operational risk of the branch; (vi) unauthorized absence from duty;
(vii) disobedience of office orders; (viii) proceeding on medical leave
without providing relevant medical certificates; and (ix) issuance of
cheques from a bank account which did not have sufficient balance.
The enquiry officer submitted an enquiry report dated 19 October 2013 C
finding the respondent guilty of all the charges.
4. The disciplinary authority issued a show-cause notice to the
respondent on 22 October 2013 to explain why he should not be dismissed
from service in view of the findings of the enquiry officer. The respondent
sought an extension of 15 days. The disciplinary authority noted that it D
had granted an extension of 5 days but not having received any response,
it imposed the penalty of dismissal from service by its order dated 06
November 2013. The appellate authority of the bank rejected the
respondent’s appeal on 03 January 2014.
5. The respondent raised an industrial dispute under the Industrial E
Disputes Act 1947 to challenge his termination before the CGIT. The
enquiry proceedings and report were held to be vitiated as they were
found to be in violation of the principles of natural justice by the Tribunal’s
order dated 25 September 2018. However, the bank was allowed to lead
evidence to justify the charges against the respondent.
F
6. Based on the evidence led before the Tribunal on the charge of
misconduct, the CGIT by its order dated 09 July 2019 came to the
conclusion that the first charge against the respondent was proved. The
CGIT found the penalty of dismissal to be harsh and disproportionate
and modified the punishment to compulsory retirement.
G
7. The appellant as well as the respondent instituted writ petitions
before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh to challenge the order of
the CGIT. The High Court affirmed the order of the CGIT. The High
Court also directed the Tribunal to compute the consequential benefits
conferred upon the respondent. The High Court directed the Tribunal to
H
514 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A pass an order in accordance with Section 10(9) and Section 10(10) of
the Industrial Disputes Act 1947.
8. On 12 March 2021, this Court issued notice against the impugned
judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court while entertaining the
Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution. This court
B observed
3 Prima facie, in our view, a serious act of misconduct stands
established from the evidentiary findings contained in paragraphs
16 and 17 of the award of the CGIT (Annexure P-9). We are
inclined to issue notice for this reason and for an additional reason
C as well.
4 The reasons set out in the judgment of the Division Bench of
the High Court dated 27 November 2020 dismissing the petition
filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution, span
over eighteen pages but are incomprehensible. For this purpose, it
D is necessary to extract paragraphs 3,4,5 and 6 of the judgment of
the High Court, which read as follows:
“3. All the afore infirmities noticed in the impugned award, to,
occur, in, Annexure P-18, remain neither contested nor any
endeavor, is made by the learned counsel, appearing for the
E employer to scuttle all the legal effects thereof. Consequently,
the afore apposite noticed infirmities, as, echoed in the impugned
award, to occur in Annexure P-18, and, appertaining, to,
affirmative conclusion(s), being made qua the workman, vis-
à-vis, the apposite thereto charges drawn against him, do,
necessarily acquire overwhelming legal weight, and, also enjoin
F theirs being revered.
4. Be that as it may, since the impugned award, is made, in
pursuance to a petition filed, before the learned Tribunal, by
the Workman, under Section 2-A, of the Industrial Disputes
Act 1947, and, when after affording, the, fullest adequate
G opportunities, to the contesting litigants, to adduce their
respective evidence(s), on the issues, falling for consideration,
the learned Tribunal proceeded to make the impugned award,
(i) thereupon the effect, if any, or the legal effect, of, Annexure
P-18, inasmuch as, it containing evidence, in support of the
conclusion(s), borne therein, does, emphatically, become(s)
H
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 515
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

subsumed, within the canvas, and, contours, of, the evidence A
adduced, respectively, by the workman, and, by the employer,
before the learned Tribunal, (ii) unless evidence emerged
through the witnesses’, who testified before the learned
Tribunal, and, upon theirs being confronted with their
statement(s), previously made before the Inquiry Officer, and,
B
its making unearthing(s), vis-à-vis, hence no credibility, being
assigned, vis-à-vis, theirs respective testification(s), made
before the learned Tribunal. However, a perusal, of, evidence,
adduced before the learned Tribunal, both by the Workman,
and, the employer, unveils, (iii) that the afore evidence, became
testified, by all the witnesses concerned, rather with the fullest C
opportunity, being afforded to the counsel, for the workman,
and, to the counsel for the employer, (iv) and, also unveils that
the counsel, for, the employer, rather omitting to, during the
process, of, his conducting their cross-examination, hence
confront them, with their previous statement, recorded before
D
the Inquiry Officer, for therethrough(s), his obviously attempting
to, hence impeach their respective credibility(ies). In summa,
hence the evidence adduced before the Tribunal concerned,
alone enjoins its, if deemed fit, being appraised by this Court.
5. The learned Tribunal, had, upon consideration, of evidence
adduced, vis-à-vis, charges No. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, hence E
concluded, qua theirs, not therethrough, becoming proven,
rather it made a conclusion, vis-à-vis, their being lack, of, cogent
evidence, or their being want, of, adduction, of, cogent evidence,
qua therewith, by the employer, and, obviously, returned
thereon(s) finding(s), adversarial, to the employer. F
Consequently, hence the appraisal, of, evidence, adduced by
the department/employer, vis-à-vis, the afore charges, does
not, merit any interference, as reading(s) thereof, obviously,
unfold qua the appraisal, of, evidence, adduced, vis-à-vis, the
afore drawn charges, hence by the learned Tribunal, hence
not, suffering from any gross mis-appraisal thereof, nor from G
any stain, of, non-appraisal, of, germane evidence, hence
adduced qua therewith, by the department/employer.
6. The ire res-controversia, erupting interse the litigants,
appertains, to findings, adversarial, to the workman, becoming
H
516 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A returned upon charge No. 1. Though the learned counsel
appearing for the workman, contends with much vigor, before
this Court, that since the CCTV footage, does not vividly
pronounce, qua the workman, tearing the apposite letter,
thereupon findings, adversarial, to the workman, were not
amenable, to be returned upon charge No. 1(supra). However,
B
the afore made submission, before this Court, by the learned
counsel for the workman, is, made without his bearing in mind,
the further facet, vis-à-vis, the workman, in his cross-
examination, making articulation(s), coined in the phraseology,
“No Branch Manager has dared to issue me letter prior to
C this”. In addition, with the Workman, despite his coming into
possession, of, the apposite letter, issued to him, by the Branch
Manger, especially when no evidence, contra therewith, became
adduced, by him, hence became enjoined, to dispel the factum,
of, his not tearing it, rather ensure its production, before the
Officer concerned. However, he failed to adduce/produce the
D
afore letter before the Officer concerned, thereupon, dehors
the CCTV footage, not graphically displaying his tearing the
apposite letter, rather not cementing or filliping any conclusion,
vis-à-vis, perse therefrom, any exculpatory finding, becoming
amenable to be returned upon charge No. 1.”
E 5 We are constrained to observe that the language in the judgment
of the High Court is incomprehensible. Judgments are intended to
convey the reasoning and process of thought which leads to the
final conclusion of the adjudicating forum. The purpose of writing
a judgment is to communicate the basis of the decision not only to
F the members of the Bar, who appear in the case and to others to
whom it serves as a precedent but above all, to provide meaning
to citizens who approach courts for pursuing their remedies under
the law. Such orders of the High Court as in the present case do
dis-service to the cause of ensuring accessible and understandable
justice to citizens.
G
6 Since the High Court has affirmed the award of the CGIT, we
have been able to arrive at an understanding of the basic facts
from the order which was challenged before the High Court. From
the record of the Court, more particularly the award of the CGIT,
it emerges that though a serious charge of misconduct was held
H
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 517
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

to be established against the respondent, it has been interfered A
with and the High Court has dismissed the petition under Article
226.”
9. Following the return of notice, we have heard Mr Sanjay Kapur,
counsel for the appellant and Mr Colin Gonsalves, senior counsel for the
respondent. B
10. The judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of
Himachal Pradesh is incomprehensible. This Court in appeal found it
difficult to navigate through the maze of incomprehensible language in
the decision of the High Court. A litigant for whom the judgment is
primarily meant would be placed in an even more difficult position. C
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 D
must write to provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of
law and fact which arise for decision. Judgments are primarily meant
for those whose cases are decided by judges. Judgments of the High
Courts and the Supreme Court also serve as precedents to guide future
benches. A judgment must make sense to those whose lives and affairs E
are affected by the outcome of the case. While a judgment is read by
those as well who have training in the law, they do not represent the
entire universe of discourse. 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. F

11. We are constrained to remit the proceedings back to the High
Court for consideration afresh. The judgment of the High Court is simply
incomprehensible leaving this Court with no option than to remand the
proceedings. The High Court must appreciate the delay and expense
occasioned as a consequence and must make an effort to record reasons G
which are understood by all stake-holders.
12. Earlier too, in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Himachal
Aluminium and Conductors,2 Sarla Sood v. Pawan Kumar Sharma,3
2
Civil Appeal No. 5032 of 2022, Supreme Court of India
3
Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 7768-7769 of 2017, Supreme Court of India H
518 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A this Court had to remand the proceedings arising out of similar judgments
of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, so that orders could be passed
afresh in language which is capable of being understood. In Shakuntala
Shukla v. State of Uttar Pradesh as well,4 a two Judge Bench of this
Court, was faced with an order of the High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad which made it difficult to discern between the submissions of
B
counsel and the reasons of the court. Laying emphasis on the purpose of
a judgment, this Court elaborated on what should be the content of a
judgment. The court observed that:
33. […] “Judgment” means a judicial opinion which tells the story
of the case; what the case is about; how the court is resolving the
C case and why. “Judgment” is defined as any decision given by a
court on a question or questions or issue between the parties to a
proceeding properly before court. It is also defined as the decision
or the sentence of a court in a legal proceeding along with the
reasoning of a judge which leads him to his decision. The term
D “judgment” is loosely used as judicial opinion or decision. Roslyn
Atkinson, J., Supreme Court of Queensland, in her speech once
stated that there are four purposes for any judgment that is written:
i) to spell out judges own thoughts;
ii) to explain your decision to the parties;
E
iii) to communicate the reasons for the decision to the public;
and
iv) to provide reasons for an appeal court to consider
34. It is not adequate that a decision is accurate, it must
F also be reasonable, logical and easily comprehensible. [….]
What the court says, and how it says it, is equally important as
what the court decides.
35. Every judgment contains four basic elements and they are (i)
statement of material (relevant) facts, (ii) legal issues or questions,
G (iii) deliberation to reach at decision and (iv) the ratio or conclusive
decision. A judgment should be coherent, systematic and
logically organised. It should enable the reader to trace
the fact to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles.
It is pertinent to examine the important elements in a judgment in
4
H (2021) SCC OnLine SC 672
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 519
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

order to fully understand the art of reading a judgment. In the A
Path of Law, Holmes J. has stressed the insentient factors that
persuade a judge. A judgment has to formulate findings of fact, it
has to decide what the relevant principles of law are, and it has to
apply those legal principles to the facts. The important elements
of a judgment are:
B
i) Caption
ii) Case number and citation
iii) Facts
iv) Issues C
v) Summary of arguments by both the parties
vi) Application of law
vii) Final conclusive verdict
36. The judgment replicates the individuality of the judge and D
therefore it is indispensable that it should be written with care and
caution. The reasoning in the judgment should be intelligible
and logical. Clarity and precision should be the goal. All
conclusions should be supported by reasons duly recorded.
The findings and directions should be precise and specific.
Writing judgments is an art, though it involves skillful E
application of law and logic. We are conscious of the fact that
the judges may be overburdened with the pending cases and the
arrears, but at the same time, quality can never be sacrificed for
quantity. Unless judgment is not in a precise manner, it would not
have a sweeping impact. There are some judgments that eventually F
get overruled because of lack of clarity. Therefore, whenever a
judgment is written, it should have clarity on facts; on submissions
made on behalf of the rival parties; discussion on law points and
thereafter reasoning and thereafter the ultimate conclusion and
the findings and thereafter the operative portion of the order. There
must be a clarity on the final relief granted. A party to the litigation G
must know what actually he has got by way of final relief. The
aforesaid aspects are to be borne in mind while writing the
judgment, which would reduce the burden of the appellate court
too. We have come across many judgments which lack clarity on
facts, reasoning and the findings and many a times it is very difficult H
520 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A to appreciate what the learned judge wants to convey through the
judgment and because of that, matters are required to be remanded
for fresh consideration. Therefore, it is desirable that the judgment
should have a clarity, both on facts and law and on submissions,
findings, reasonings and the ultimate relief granted.
B (emphasis supplied)
13. Amidst an overburdened judicial docket, a view is sometimes
voiced that parties are concerned with the outcome and little else. This
view proceeds on the basis that parties value the outcome and not the
reasoning which constitutes the foundation. This view undervalues the
C importance of the judicial function and of the reasons which are critical
to it. The work of a judge cannot be reduced to a statistic about
the disposal of a case. Every judgment is an incremental step towards
consolidation and change. In adhering to precedent, the judgment reflects
a commitment to protecting legal principle. This imparts certainty to the
law. Each judgment is hence a brick in the consolidation of the fundamental
D precepts on which a legal order is based. But in incremental steps a
judgment addresses the need to evolve and to transform by addressing
critical issues which confront human existence. 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
E the quality of the reasons as much as by the manner in which the judicial
process is structured.
14. Lord Burrows of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom,
in his speech at the Annual Conference of Judges of the Superior Courts
in Ireland stressed upon the importance of clarity, coherence and
F conciseness in judgment writing.5 Lord Burrows also noted the importance
of the judgment being written in a manner that it is accessible to all
considering its wide and varied potential audience. He noted:6
For senior judges, one’s target audience must include the parties
themselves, the legal advisers to those parties, other judges, other
G practising lawyers, academic lawyers and students, and last but
by no means least the public at large.

5
Lord Burrows, Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Judgment-
Writing: A Personal Perspective, Annual Conference of Judges of the Superior Courts
in Ireland, 20 May 2021
6
H Ibid
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 521
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

Lord Burrows also reiterates the view of Lord Bingham, that a A
judgment which is unclear or not concise and therefore inaccessible
may contradict the rule of law:7
(T)here is the view that a judgment that is unclear or not concise
and therefore inaccessible may contradict the rule of law. The
great Lord Bingham – a master of judgment-writing if ever there B
was one – suggested this in his book, The Rule of Law. Having
laid down as his first concretised element of the rule of law that
‘the law must be accessible’ he went on as follows:
‘The judges are quite ready to criticise the obscurity and
complexity of legislation. But those who live in glass houses C
are ill-advised to throw stones. The length, elaboration and
prolixity of some common law judgments… can in themselves
have the effect of making the law to some extent inaccessible.’
15. In a piece of academic writing, Justice Daphne Barak-Erez
of the Supreme Court of Israel distinguished between academic writing D
and judgment writing. While alluding to the importance of judgments
being written in an accessible manner,8 Justice Daphne Barak-Erez notes:
For judges, the professional community is only one of their several
audiences. Judges write first and foremost for the parties appearing
before them, for the state’s agents who are in charge of E
enforcement, and for the public. Although judgments are
professional legal documents, and sometimes involve complex
technical and legal analyses, they should also be accessible, or at
least explicable, to people who are not professionals, as they define
the law for a larger community.
F
16. A judgment culminates in a conclusion. But its content
represents the basis for the conclusion. 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 G
why what is written has been written. The reasons, as much as the final
conclusion, are open to scrutiny. A judgment is written primarily for the
7
Ibid
8
Justice Daphne Barak-Erez, Writing Law: Reflections on Judicial Decisions and
Academic Scholarship, (2015) 41-1 QUEEN’S LAW JOURNAL 255 H
522 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A parties in a forensic contest. The scrutiny is first and foremost by the
person for whom the decision is meant - the conflicting parties before
the court. At a secondary level, reasons furnish the basis for challenging
a judicial outcome in a higher forum. The validity of the decision is tested
by the underlying content and reasons. But there is more. Equally
significant is the fact that a judgment speaks to the present and to the
B
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. Judgment writing
C is hence a critical instrument in fostering the rule of law and in curbing
rule by the law.
17. 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.
D 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. Whether or not the writer of a judgment envisions it, the
written product remains for the future, representing another incremental
step in societal dialogue. If a judgment does not measure up, it can be
E critiqued and criticized. Behind the layers of reason is the vision of the
adjudicator over the values which a just society must embody and defend.
In a constitutional framework, these values have to be grounded in the
Constitution. The reasons which a judge furnishes provides a window -
an insight - into the work of the court in espousing these values as an
integral element of the judicial function.
F
18. Many judgments do decide complex questions of law and of
fact. Brevity is an unwitting victim of an overburdened judiciary. It is
also becoming a victim of the cut-copy-paste convenience afforded by
software developers. This Court has been providing headings and sub-
headings to assist the reader in providing a structured sequence.
G Introduced and popularized in judgment writing by Lord Denning, this
development has been replicated across jurisdictions.9

9
Supra (Lord Burrows)
H
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 523
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

19. Lord Neuberger, the former President of the Supreme Court A
of the United Kingdom, discussed in the course of a lecture10 the
importance of clearly written judgments:
A second small change worth considering would be for more judges
to give better guidance to the structure and contents of their longer
Judgments. Some judges already provide a clear framework, B
sometimes with a table of contents, a roadmap, at the beginning,
and often with appropriate headings, signposts, throughout the
Judgment. Kimble’s study confirms that this is not just a good
discipline but it is what the legal professional readers want, and, if
it is what lawyers want, it is a fortiori what non-lawyers will want.
A clear structure aids accessibility. C

20. 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.
D
21. On the note of accessibility, the importance of making judgments
accessible to persons from all sections of society, especially persons
with disability needs emphasis. 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. E
On the same note, 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 practice of printing and scanning documents is a futile and time-
consuming process which does not serve any purpose. The practice F
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.
22. In terms of structuring judgments, it would be beneficial for
courts to structure them in a manner such that the ‘Issue, Rule, Application
G
and Conclusion’ are easily identifiable. The well-renowned ‘IRAC’
method generally followed for analyzing cases and structuring submissions
can also benefit judgments when it is complemented by recording the
facts and submissions.
10
Lord Neuberger, No Judgment – No Justice, First Annual British and Irish Legal
Information In stitute (BAILII) Lecture (20 November 2012) H
524 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A 23. The ‘Issue’ refers to the question of law that the court is
deciding. A court may be dealing with multiple issues in the same
judgment. Identifying these issues clearly helps structure the judgment
and provides clarity for the reader on the specific issue of law being
decided in a particular segment of a judgment. The ‘Rule’ refers to the
portion of the judgment which distils the submissions of counsel on the
B
applicable law and doctrine for the issue identified. This rule is applied to
the facts of the case in which the issue has arisen. The analysis recording
the reasoning of a court forms the ‘Application’ section.
24. Finally, it is always useful for a court to summarize and lay out
the ‘Conclusion’ on the basis of its determination of the application of
C the rule to the issue along with the decision vis-à-vis the specific facts.
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.
25. Justice M.M. Corbett, Former Chief Justice of the Supreme
D Court of South Africa, in a lecture at an orientation course for new
judges,11 recommended a similar structure which facilitates orderliness
and produces a logical, flowing judgment:
(a) An introductory section;

E (b) Setting out of the facts:
(c) The law and the issues;
(d) Applying the law to the facts;
(e) Determining the relief (including order for costs); and
F (f) Finally, the order of the Court.
26. Although it is unfortunate that we have to set aside the impugned
judgment and direct its remand due to its incoherence, we have taken
the opportunity to lay out the above discussion on judgment writing.
Incoherent judgments have a serious impact upon the dignity of our
G institutions.
27. While we have laid down some broad guidelines, 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
11
Justice M.M. Corbett, Writing a Judgment - Address at the First Orientation Course
H for New Judges, (1998) 115 S OUTH AFRICAN LAW JOURNAL 116
STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER v. AJAY KUMAR 525
SOOD [DR. DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.]

is an unfolding of the recesses of the mind. However, while recesses of A
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. This has also been captured by
Justice Corbett,12 in the following extract:
For lucidity should be the prime aim of any judgment-writer. At B
the same time, certain aspects of style have a bearing on lucidity.
In this connection, my advice (for what it is worth) is to keep
your language and your sentence construction simple. Write
in short sentences and do not try to pack too many ideas
into a single sentence. Particularly in setting out facts, try
to maintain a simple, straightforward flow to your narrative. C
Try to avoid the repetition of words or phrases and observe
the normal rules of grammar. A well-known exponent of simple
language and the simple sentence was Lord Denning.
(emphasis supplied)
D
28. Echoing a similar sentiment, Justice Michael Kirby, a
distinguished former judge of the High Court of Australia notes:13
Brevity, simplicity and clarity. These are the hallmarks of good
judgment writing. But the greatest of these is clarity.
29. In view of the incomprehensibility of the impugned judgment, E
we allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court of
Himachal Pradesh dated 27 November 2020 in CWPs No 3597 of 2020
along with 4844 of 2020.
30. CWPs No 3597 of 2020 along with 4844 of 2020 are restored
to the file of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh for being considered F
afresh. In paragraphs 3 and 6 of the earlier order of this Court dated 12
March 2021, certain observations are contained on the merits of the
award of the CGIT and on the finding of misconduct which was arrived
at against the respondent in the disciplinary proceedings. Since the
proceedings are being remitted back to the High Court, it is clarified on
G
the request of counsel for the respondent, that all the rights and
contentions of the parties on merits are kept open.

12
Ibid
13
Justice Michael Kirby, On the Writing of Judgments, (1990) 64 AUSTRALIAN LAW
JOURNAL 691 H
526 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 17 S.C.R.

A 31. Considering that the writ petitions were filed in 2020 and the
termination of service goes back to the year 2013, we would request the
High Court to expedite the disposal of the writ petitions.
32. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

B Nidhi Jain and Anurag Bhaskar Appeal allowed.
(Assisted by : Priyanshu Agarwal, LCRA)

C

D

E

F

G

H