Judgment — Form, Contents and Delivery (ss.392–406 BNSS) — BNSS (Criminal Law II) Notes

Judgment — Form, Contents and Delivery (ss.392–406 BNSS)

A judgment is the court’s final, reasoned word — but it is not “delivered” until it is spoken in open court. A conviction that a judge writes but never pronounces is like a letter written and never posted: it has no legal life. The examiner’s trap is exactly that half-finished judgment.

A judgment is the final decision of the court, stating the conviction or acquittal, with reasons.

A. Delivery (s.392 [s.353 CrPC])

The judgment must be pronounced in open court by the presiding officer, immediately after the trial or at a later notified time, in the language of the court. It is dated and signed. A judgment is complete only when pronounced; an unpronounced judgment has no effect, and a successor judge cannot simply sign a predecessor’s unpronounced conviction.

B. Contents (s.393 [s.354 CrPC])

Every judgment shall contain:

The point(s) for determination;
The decision and the reasons for it;
The offence and the section of law, and the sentence;
In an acquittal, the offence of which the accused is acquitted and a direction to set him at liberty.
In a death sentence, the special reasons for it (s.393(3)).

Language and copy (ss.394–395). A copy of the judgment is given free of cost to the accused; the BNSS requires judgments to be delivered within fixed timelines.
Compensation and costs (ss.395, 401). The court may order compensation to the victim and, in a suitable case, release on probation of good conduct or after admonition.

D. Finality — the court becomes functus officio (s.403 [s.362 CrPC])

Once a court has signed its judgment or final order, it cannot alter or review it — it has discharged its function and is functus officio [having performed its office]. The only exceptions are to correct a clerical or arithmetical error, or where a specific power (such as review) is expressly given by the Sanhita or another law. A trial court cannot recall its judgment to re-hear the case, add to the sentence, or reconsider the merits; the remedy against a completed judgment is appeal, reference or revision to a higher court, not a fresh look by the same court. This is what makes the judgment, once signed, the final act of the trial.

🧩 WORKED EXAMPLE — the unpronounced sentence

Facts. A Sessions Court convicts A but does not announce the sentence, and the judge then ceases to hold office.

Rule. A judgment is complete only when pronounced in open court (s.392); the sentence is an essential part of it (s.393).

Apply. Since the sentence was never pronounced, the judgment is incomplete; a successor judge cannot merely sign and pronounce the predecessor’s conviction as his own.

Conclusion. The judgment is not complete; the matter must be reheard on sentence (and, if necessary, the trial concluded afresh). The decoy is that the conviction looks final.

Section 392(1) BNSS: “The judgment in every trial in any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of which notice shall be given to the parties or their advocates…”

In Simple Terms: A judgment only counts once the judge reads it out in open court; until then it has no legal effect.

flowchart TD
    ROOT["Judgment ss.392-406"]:::root
    ROOT --> A["Delivery s.392<br/>pronounced in open court, dated, signed"]:::sidebox
    ROOT --> B["Contents s.393<br/>points, reasons, offence+section, sentence"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> C["Death sentence: special reasons s.393(3)"]:::leaf
    ROOT --> D["Free copy to accused; compensation s.395"]:::leaf
    classDef root fill:#FFF8DC,stroke:#000,stroke-width:1px,color:#000;
    classDef leaf fill:#E6F3FF,stroke:#1E3A8A,color:#000;
    classDef sidebox fill:#FDE7C9,stroke:#B45309,color:#000;
    linkStyle default stroke:#888,stroke-width:1px;

Case Laws

Surendra Singh v. State of U.P. (1954) — a judgment is complete only on pronouncement in open court; an unpronounced judgment is a nullity.
State of Punjab v. Jagdev Singh Talwandi (1984) — judgments must be clear, self-contained and give reasons.

📄 Full notes + Question Bank (₹199) — every topic in depth, model answers to all past KSLU questions, in one printable PDF. Get the bundle · 10 Solved Problems · All BNSS (Criminal Law II) topics

Judgment — Form, Contents and Delivery (ss.392–406 BNSS) — BNSS (Criminal Law II) Notes