NARAYAN YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.

(2.) SRI Ram Balak Mahto, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the impugned order at annexure -1 passed by the appellate authority is contrary to law and is neither speaking in nature reflecting application of mind nor is in consonance with the direction of this Court given in C.W.J.C. No. 6219 of 2003 vide order dated 19.8.2003 with regard to the issue of proportionality of the punishment.

(3.) THE Court, considering the submission on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the impugned appellate order, is satisfied that the same is not in accordance with law, as an appellate order should be. The order is completely unreasoned and non -speaking in nature. The order does not contain any discussion, albeit even briefly, which could demonstrate application of mind and due consideration reflecting what was passing the mind of the appellate authority. The absence of these factors clearly hinders judicial review.