Take this message home with lucid explanations, eliminating the use of rough expressions, a DY Judge’s bench Chandrachud and LIKE Bopanna The use of complex and lengthy sentences in judgments detracts from the effectiveness of the distribution of justice because they confuse litigants about how and why a court would decide, said on Tuesday the use of complex and lengthy sentences. make a specific decision.
The main job of language is communication. It would be a form of off-target if it was used for obfuscation. Judgments and orders often involve ordinary people and they should be understandable to them. The Supreme Court was right. But it also needs to create a mechanism to ensure that comments are translated into action.
Watch time:
Limit a judgment of an assigned bench of Himachal Pradesh HC “Unintelligible” and “difficult to navigate” even for Supreme Court justices, who have spent more than two decades as constitutional court judges, the bench said, “An incumbent where the sentence is primarily significant will be placed in an even more difficult situation than the Ministry. Without any legal training, the litigant is confronted with language that is not heard, written, or spoken in contemporary terms.”
Writing the verdict, Justice Chandrachud said, “The language of a judgment defeats the purpose of judicial writing. Writing judgments of this type before we appeal reduces the efficiency of the adjudication process. The purpose of judicial writing is not to confuse or confuse the reader behind the shell of complex language. ”
The chairman said judgments have precedent value and are not just for judges or lawyers.
Another important aspect of judgment writing – brevity – has become a victim in an age of cut-paste-copy convenience provided by computer software, a Justice knowledgeable about lament technology. Chandrahcudwho conducts paperless proceedings using a soft copy of the case file.
While giving broad guidelines for writing judgments, the curator said they didn’t intend to kill the flair and style of writing judgments, which are unique to each judge’s way of expressing his thoughts.
