Incomplete criminal judgment on all framed charges may justify limited remand without disturbing decided findings.

Where a criminal judgment omits findings on some framed charges, the adjudication is incomplete because the court must decide each accusation placed for trial. The High Court held that the trial court had dealt only with some charges while leaving others unresolved, and the proper course was not a full retrial but a limited remand. Exercising appellate power under Section 386 CrPC, and inherent power under Section 482 where necessary to secure justice, the court set aside the incomplete judgment and sentence only to the extent required, directing the trial court to decide the remaining charges while preserving the findings already recorded.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the trial court had passed an incomplete judgment by omitting findings on all charges framed against the accused; (ii) whether the appellate court could set aside the judgment and remand the matter for a limited purpose in exercise of its appellate and inherent powers.

Issue (i): Whether the trial court had passed an incomplete judgment by omitting findings on all charges framed against the accused.

Analysis: The judgment of the trial court dealt with the conviction for murder of one deceased and attempt to murder of one injured witness, but it remained silent on the corresponding charges relating to the other deceased and the other injured witness. A criminal judgment must contain findings on each charge or accusation that is required to be decided. Silence on some of the framed charges leaves the adjudication incomplete.

Conclusion: The trial court had passed an incomplete judgment.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellate court could set aside the judgment and remand the matter for a limited purpose in exercise of its appellate and inherent powers.

Analysis: The appellate court has power under Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to deal with a conviction appeal and may also, where necessary to secure the ends of justice, invoke Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Since the omission was confined to certain charges and did not require a full retrial, the proper course was a limited remand directing the trial court to decide only the left-out charges while keeping the already recorded findings intact.

Conclusion: The judgment and sentence were set aside and the matter was remanded for limited adjudication of the omitted charges.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of correction of the incomplete adjudication, and the matter was returned to the trial court for decision on the remaining charges without disturbing the findings already recorded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a trial court judgment omits findings on some framed charges, the appellate court may set aside the incomplete adjudication and direct a limited remand, and may invoke inherent powers to secure the ends of justice when a full retrial is unnecessary.

---