Ratio Decidendi and Obiter Dictum

Article 141 of the Constitution unequivocally indicates that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all Courts within the territory of India. The aforesaid Article empowers the Supreme Court to declare the law. It is, therefore, an essential function of the Court to interpret a legislation.
Ratio Decidendi
The statements of the Court on matters other than law like facts may have no binding force as the facts of two cases may not be similar. But what is binding is the ratio of the decision and not any finding of facts.
It is the principle found out upon a reading of a judgment as a whole, in the light of the questions before the Court that forms the ratio and not any particular word or sentence.
To determine whether a decision has ‘declared law’ it cannot be said to be a law when a point is disposed of on concession and what is binding is the principle underlying a decision.
A judgment of the Court has to be read in the context of questions which arose for consideration in the case in which the judgment was delivered.
Obiter Dictum
An ‘obiter dictum’ as distinguished from a ratio decidendi is an observation by Court on a legal question suggested in a case before it but not arising in such manner as to require a decision.
Such an obiter may not have a binding precedent as the observation was unnecessary for the decision pronounced, but even though an obiter may not have a bind effect as a precedent, but it cannot be denied that it is of considerable weight.
The law which will be binding under Article 141 would, therefore, extend to all observations of points raised and decided by the Court in a given case.
So far as constitutional matters are concerned, it is a practice of the Court not to make any pronouncement on points not directly raised for its decision.
The decision in a judgment of the Supreme Court cannot be assailed on the ground that certain aspects were not considered or the relevant provisions were not brought to the notice of the Court.
When Supreme Court decides a principle it would be the duty of the High Court or a subordinate Court to follow the decision of the Supreme Court.
Case Reference
A.    P. v. M. R. Apparao (AIR 2002 SC 1598)
B.     V. Gopi Vs. Bhaskaran Kerala High court decided on 05.08.2015

Disclaimer: All the contents are for general use and information. Consult your lawyer before acting.


Comments

Post a Comment

All the contents are for educational purpose only. Consult your lawyer for more information.

Popular posts from this blog

Power of Attorney in Negotiable Instruments Act

JIMMY MADAM VS BOLLY HINDLEY 2005 MAH LR 478 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 302--Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Section 138--Permission to conduct prosecution--Complaint of dishonour of cheque--Death of complainant--Power of attorney of legal heirs of deceased directly permitted to conduct prosecution--High Court upheld trial Courts decision--Maintainability of application of power of attorney--Held, power of attorney can not be allowed to represent the concerned persons in the proceedings without such permission is sought from the Court by the concerned persons--Further  held, power of attorney holder can represent the concerned party, in case permission for such representation is sought from the Court by the concerned person and granted by it--Liberty granted to legal heirs to make application to continue proceeding by themselves or to grant permission to them to authorize the power of attorney holders to continue the prosecution on their behalf.  K VASA...
Read more

NON EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

State of U.P. v. Madan  Mohan [(1989) 3 SCC 390]) Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given in the dying   declaration , the said  declaration  cannot be acted upon. Constitution of India,1950 -- Article 136 -- Appeal against acquittal by the High Court -- No reason given for interference -- Supreme Court refused to interfere the order of the High Court in acquitting the accused. -Failure of the prosecution to explain cut injury on the thing of the accused who reached police station with bleeding injury -- No inference could be drawn that the injury was self inflicted. The doubtful circumstance as stated by the High Court is that the respondent had suffered a cut injury on his thing and he has immediately gone to the police station with bleeding injury which was admitted by the Investigating Officer. It is also not disputed that the accused had lodged a complaint giving his own version regarding the incident. It is, therefore, c...
Read more

Some Important Citations On Addition of Accused Persons

2014 AIR(SC) 1400 : 2014 AIR(SCW) 667 : 2014 All.M.R.(Cri) 801 : 2014 (1) Bom.C.R.(Cri.) 772 : 2014 DGLS(SC) 35 : 2014 (1) JT 412 : 2014 (1) Scale 241 : 2014 (3) SCC 92 : 2014 (1) Supreme 132 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Secs. 193, 200, 201, 202, 319 & 398 - Scope and extent of - Powers of Courts - To arraign any person as accused - During course of inquiry - What is stage at which power under section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure can be exercised? - Whether word "evidence" used in section 319(1) Code of Criminal Procedure has been used in a comprehensive sense and includes evidence collected during investigation or word "evidence" is limited to evidence recorded during trial? - Held, after committal, cognizance of an offence can be taken against a person not named as an accused but against whom materials are available from the papers filed by the police after completion of investigation. Such cognizance can be taken under section 193 Code of Crimi...
Read more