No Authority or court can flout the ruling of SC

New Delhi, Mar 31 (UNI) The Supreme Court has ruled that no authority or court, even the highest court of a state under any pretext can violate the law laid down by the highest court of the country.

A Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and Lokeshwar Singh Panta also reminded the authorities and the courts, including the high courts, of their constitutional obligations under Article 141 of the Constitution which says all courts and authorities are bound the judgment of the apex court.

The ruling, came on an appeal filed by the state of Himachal Pardesh whose appeal against an order of acquittal was dismissed by the high court without assigning any reason.

The apex court the accepted the fact that failure to give reasons for any administrative of judicial decision amounts to denial of justice.

The court while dismissing the appeal of state in view of findings of the trial court and the reasons recorded by it in its acquittal order passed in favour of Mushtaq Ahmad observed,"The high court has not given any reasons for refusing to grant leave to file an appeal against acquittal and seems to have been completely oblivious to the fact that by such refusal a close scrutiny of the order of acquittal by the appellate forum, has been lost once and for all. The manner in which appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by the high court leaves much to be desired." The apex court also noted in its judgment dated March 26,"The absence of reasons has rendered the high court order not sustainable. Judicial discipline to abide by declaration of law this court, cannot be forsaken, under any pretext by any authority or court, be it even the highest court in a state, oblivious to Article 141 of the Constitution of India. Even in administrative orders it hass been observed by Lord Dennings that the giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration and in another judgment it has been failure to give reasons amounts to denial of jusytice." Justice Pasayat, writing judgment for the bench in five page ruling also noted, "Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taker to the controversy in question and decision concludsions arrived at. Reight to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient indicate an application of mind to the matter before court. One of solitary requirement of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words,a speaking out. The " inscrutable face of a sphinx" is ordinarily incongurous with a judical or quasi judicial performanve." The court finally concluded by saying,"The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the inscrutable face of the sphinx, it can , by its silence render it virtually impossible for the courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjuging the validity of the decision.THe grievance of learned counsel for the petitioner state about the manner in which the petition has been dismissed is unexceptionable. But we have perused the judgment of the trial court. Considering the nature of findings recorded we do not consider this to be a fit case where exercise of jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution is called for, the petition is accordingly dismissed.

UNI