Reasons is the heart beat of every conclusion, without the same, it becomes lifeless:-

 

Reasons is the heart beat of every conclusion, without the same, it becomes lifeless:-

In law, a judgment is a decision of a  Court  regarding the rights and liabilities of parties in a legal action or proceeding. Judgments also generally provide the court's explanation of why it has chosen to make a particular order. The phrase "reasons for judgment" is often used interchangeably with "judgment," although the former refers to the court's justification of its judgment while the latter refers to the final Court  order regarding the rights and liabilities of the parties. As the main legal systems of the world recognize either a common law, statutory, or constitutional duty to provide reasons for a judgment, drawing a distinction between "judgment" and "reasons for judgment" may be unnecessary in most circumstances. A judgment pronounced on the bench, regarded as an intellectual product, stands in a class by itself.

 

In Halsbury’s Laws of England(4^th Edition,Vol.26,P.260),it has been said,

“A Judgment or order in its final shape usually contains in addition to formal parts:- (i).A preliminary or introductory part, showing the form of the application upon which it was made, the manner in which and the place at which, the writ or other originating process was served, the parties appearing any consent,waivers,undertakings or admissions given or made, so placed as to indicate whether they relate to the whole judgment or order or only part of it, and a reference to the evidence upon which the judgment or order is based and  (ii).a substantive or mandatory part, containing the order made by the court.”

 

The reasons for a judgment are of course of special importance to the parties to litigation. They are bound to abide by the decision pronounced by the Court & need to understand how the Court has dealt with their case & reached its decision. Sir Harry (Law Dinner Emmanuel College, University of Queensland, Australia) observed that in our society, it is important that the parties to litigation be convinced that justice has been done or at the least, that an honest, careful & conscientious effort has been made to do justice in their case. This is not to underestimate the importance of reasons for judgment to the wider public. Many judgments have an importance beyond the resolution of the dispute between the parties to the litigation.

Providing of reasons in orders is of essence in judicial proceedings. Every litigant who approaches the Court with a prayer is entitled to know the reasons for acceptance or rejection of such request (Chandna Impex Pvt.Ltd.vs Commissioner of Customs,New Delhi:2011 (269) ELT-433(SC). It is the reasoning which ultimately culminates into final decision which may be subject to examination of the appellate or other higher Court. The reasoned order should be in accordance with the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court,: (2004) 7 SCC-431, Cyril Lasrado (Dead) By L.Rs. & Ors Vs Juliana Maria Lasrado and Another:

“Even in respect of administrative orders Lord Denning, M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engg. Union observed (All ER p. 115, 4th). "The giving of reason is one of the fundamentals of good administration". In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree it was observed: "Failure to give reasons amount to denial of justice. Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision-taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at". Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity(State of Punjab vs Bhag Singh:2004 (48) ACC-308(SC). 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 adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out. The "inscrutable face of the sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.

Reasons is the heart beat of every conclusion, without the same, it becomes lifeless as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar,: (2003) 11 SCC 519;Vishnu Dev Sharma vs State of UP & ors : (2008) 3 SCC-172;SAIL vs Sales Tax Officer,Rourkela I Circle & ors  (2008) 9 SCC-407;State of Uttaranchal & anr vs Sunil Kumar Singh Negi :AIR 2008 SC-2026;UPSRTC vs Jagdish Prasad Gupta :AIR 2009 SC-2328;Md.Yusuf vs Raij Mohammad & ors : (2009) 3 SCC-513 & State of HP vs Sada Ram & anr : (2009) 4 SCC-422). How to consider the case is as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of R.P. Bhatt v. Union of India,: (1986) 2 SCC 651 and Divisional Forest Officer, Kothagundum and Others v. Madhusudan Rao,: AIR 2008 (2) SC 253; State of Rajasthan vs Rajendra Prasad Jain:(2008) 15 SCC-711.

A Court of law must base its decision on appreciation of evidence brought on record by applying the correct legal principles. Surmises & conjectures cannot form the basis of a judgment (Navanath & ors vs State of Maharashtra: (2009) 14 SCC-480).Reasons are the link between the materials on which certain conclusions are based & the actual conclusions. They disclose how the mind is applied to the subject-matter for a decision whether it is purely administrative or quasi-judicial. They should reveal a rational nexus between the facts considered & the conclusions reached. Only in this way can opinions or decisions recorded be shown to be manifestly just and reasonable (Uma Charan vs State of M.P.:AIR 1981 SC-1915 ;Mc Dermott International Inc. Vs Burn Standard Co.Ltd & ors :(2006) 11 SCC-181;Competition Commission of India vs SAIL & anr: JT 2010 (10) SC-16.

It is trite law that it is incumbent upon the authorities to pass a speaking & reasoned order even in administrative matters. A right to reason has been held to be an indispensable part of sound system of judicial review by Apex Court, in case of State of W.B. Vs Atul Kishore Shaw reported in 1991 Supp.(1) SCC-414 & in State of Orissa vs Dhaniram Luhar (2004) 5 SCC-568.Necessity & purpose of recording reasons has been reiterated & emphasized by Apex Court in case of Ravi Yashwant Bhoir Vs Collector,Raigad & ors reported in  (2012) 4 SCC-407 in the following words:-

“The emphasis on recording reason is that if the decision reveals the 'inscrutable face of the sphinx', it can be its silence, render it virtually impossible for the courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind of the authority before the court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made. In other words, a speaking out, the inscrutable face of the sphinx is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.”

In Ram Phal Vs The state of Haryana & ors reported in (2009) 3 SCC-258,the Apex Court has held that  the High Court without examining any one of the issues raised and canvassed, by cryptic & non-reasoned order, has dismissed the writ petition. The duty to give reasons for coming to a decision is of decisive importance which cannot be lawfully disregarded. The giving of the satisfactory reasons is required by the ordinary man’s sense of justice and also a healthy discipline for all those who exercise power over others. There is another reason for ignoring the aforesaid order, dropping the cancellation proceeding of registration. The said order does not contain any reasons. Reasons introduce clarity in an order.

An order without valid reasons cannot be sustained. To give reasons is the rule of natural justice. Highlighting this rule, the Apex Court has held in the case of the Secretary & Curator,Victoria Memorial Vs Howrah Ganatantrik Nagrik Samity & ors reported in JT 2010 (2) SC-566 in the following ways:-

“It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also judicial order must be supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while deciding an issue, the Court is bound to give reasons for its conclusion. It is the duty and obligation on the part of the Court to record reasons while disposing of the case. The hallmark of an order and exercise of judicial power by a judicial forum is to disclose its reasons by itself and giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of the fundamentals of sound administration justice - delivery system, to make known that there had been proper and due application of mind to the issue before the Court and also as an essential requisite of principles of natural justice. "The giving of reasons for a decision is an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of a matter before Courts, and which is the only indication to know about the manner and quality of exercise undertaken, as also the fact that the Court concerned had really applied its mind. Absence of reasons renders the order indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is subject to further challenge before a higher forum.”

In Jawahar Lal Singh vs Naresh Singh reported in (1987) 2 SCC-222,the the Apex Court while accepting the plea that absence of examination of reasons by the High Court on the basis of which the trial Court discarded prosecution evidence & recorded the finding of an acquittal in favour of all the accused was not appropriate & held that the order should record reasons. In case of State of UP vs Battan & ors: (2001) 10 SCC-607,the Apex Court has held that the High Court has not given any reasons for refusing to grant leave to file appeal against acquittal. The manner in which appeal against acquittal has been dealt with by the High Court leaves much to be desired & the absence of reasons has rendered the  order not sustainable.

In Omar Salay Mohamed Sait vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras  reported in AIR 1959 SC-1238,the Apex Court has held as under:-

“We are aware that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is a fact finding Tribunal and if it arrives at its own conclusions of fact after due consideration of the evidence before it this court will not interfere. It is necessary, however, that every fact for and against the assessee must have been considered with due care and the Tribunal must have given its finding in a manner which would clearly indicate what were the questions which arose for determination, what was the evidence pro and contra in regard to each one of them and what were was the reached on the evidence on record before it. The conclusions reached by the Tribunal should not be coloured by any irrelevant considerations or matters of prejudice and if there are any circumstances which required to be explained by the assessee, the assessee should be given an opportunity of doing so. On no account whatever should the Tribunal base its findings on suspicions, conjectures or surmises nor should it act on no evidence at all or on improper rejection of material and relevant evidence or partly on evidence and partly on suspicions, conjectures or surmises and if it does anything of the sort, its findings, even though on questions of fact, will be liable to be set aside by this court”.

Recently, in the case of  Commissioner of Income-tax,(Exemptions) vs Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority reported in (2019) 103 taxmann.com-82(SC),it was held that the Ahmedabad Urban Dev.Authority it was a  registered trust u/s 12 AA & assessee claimed exemptions u/ss 11 & 12 but the Assessing Officer rejected assesse’s claim. He also passed penalty order u/s 27191)(C) of Income-tax Act,1961 for raising a false claim. Commissioner (Appeals) deleted penalty on ground that assessee had succeeded before High Court in quantum additions. Tribunal confirmed order of Commissioner but the High Court opined that it was not a case where a totally unsustainable & fictitious claim was put forth. According to High Court, it was a case where a statutory body had been contending that looking to its creation, constitution and kind of activities carried on, exemption under Act was available & said claim was accepted by High Court in a detailed reasoned judgment. Thus High Court concluded that no case of penalty was made out. So the Apex Court dismissed the SLP filed against the order of High Court.

 

Patricia Wald,Chief Justice of the D.C.Circuit Court of Appeals (USA) in his one Article has observed as under:-

“My own guiding principle is that virtually every appellate decision requires some statement of reasons. The discipline of writing even a few sentences or paragraphs explaining the basis for the judgment insures a level of thought and scrutiny by the Court that a bare signal of affirmance, dismissal or reversal does not”.

Thus, it is evident that the recording of reasons is principle of natural justice and every judicial order must be supported by reasons recorded in writing. It ensures transparency and fairness in decision making. Opinion of the Court alone can explain the cause which led to passing of the final order. The person who is adversely affected may know, as why his application has been rejected. The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a losing litigant has a cause to plead & a right to challenge the order if it is adverse to him. Whether an argument was rejected validly or otherwise, reasoning of the order alone can show. To evaluate the submissions is obligation of the authority & to know the reasons for rejection of its contention is a legitimate expectation on the part of the litigant. When reasons are announced & can be weighed, the public can have assurance that the correcting process is working. Announcing reasons can also provide public understanding of how the numerous decisions of the system are integrated.