Section 367 (1) of the Code provides that every judgment shall, except as otherwise expressly provided by the Code, be written by the Presiding...

  Officer of the Court or from the dictation of such Presiding Officer in the Language of the Court or in English; and shall contain the points or points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision; and shall be dated and signed by the Presiding Officer in open Court at the time of pronouncing it and where it is not written by the Presiding Officer with his own hand, every page of such judgment shall be signed by him. The provision lays down that every judgment should contain the point or points for determination, the decision thereupon and the reasons for the decision. The latter requirement is sine qua non for the judicious dispensation of a criminal case. The reasons should be rational with the facts and the attending circumstances, being made basis to form any opinion. An opinion without reasons with reference to the facts/evidence cannot be termed to be a judicious dispensation which, of course, effects right of either party. The very structure of any judgment should flow from the facts/evidence, made basis to draw said opinion.

It had been the consistent view of the Hon’ble Apex Court that for judicial dispensation, the points for determination, decision thereupon and the reasons for decision are essential having binding status.

The failure of the Trial Court to specify the points for determination as required under section 367 of the Code is an omission, not curable under section 537 of the Code and absence of decision on the said points and want of reasons in the judgment amounts to an illegality that prejudices the case of the accused.

Crl. Appeal No.124 of 2021
Muhammad Shah Versus The State
08-03-2023