What is the Meaning of 'Obiter Dictum' or 'Obiter Dicta'?

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Today, I will talk about the case of Jarnail Singh v. Lacchmi Narain Gupta, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 96, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court discussed the meaning of ‘obiter dictum’.

 

MEANING

 

Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition, defines ‘obiter dictum’ as: -

 

“A judicial comment made while delivering a judicial opinion, but one that is unnecessary to the decision in the case and therefore not precedential (although it may be considered persuasive).”

 

Thus, ‘obiter dictum’ is a remark or an opinion expressed by a judge in his decision that is incidentally and not directly related to the question of law before the Court. According to the Court, “it is any statement of law enunciated by the Judge or court merely by way of illustration, argument, analogy, or suggestion…. In the common speech of lawyers, all such extrajudicial expressions of legal opinion are referred to as “dicta”, or “obiter dicta”, these two terms being used interchangeably.”

 

The Supreme Court also discussed the definition provided in Wharton Law Lexicon (14^th Edition) that explains ‘obiter dictum’ as “an opinion not necessary to a judgment” or “an observation as to the law made by a Judge in the course of a case, but not necessary to its decision, and therefore, of no binding effect.”

 

RATIO DECIDENDI V. OBITER DICTUM

 

The Court further noted that “a decision on a point not necessary for the purpose of or which does not fall for determination in that decision becomes an obiter dictum” and “it is a well-settled proposition that only the ratio decidendi can act as the binding or authoritative precedent. Reliance placed on mere general observations or casual expressions of the Court, is not of much avail.”

 

WORD OF CAUTION

 

The Court also cautioned that judges are not oracles and ‘obiter dictum’ does not have any binding effect as such observations are not conclusive in nature. When a judgment is pronounced by a court, “it is not possible for Judges always to express their judgments so as to exclude entirely the risk that in some subsequent case their language may be misapplied and any attempt at such perfection of expression can only lead to the opposite result of uncertainty and even obscurity as regards the case in hand.”

 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

 

In light of the afore-stated enunciation of law, following important points emerge: -

 

a. ‘obiter dictum’ is “an observation as to the law made by a Judge in the course of a case, but not necessary to its decision, and therefore, of no binding effect.”

 

b. “Only the ratio decidendi can act as the binding or authoritative precedent.”

 

c. ‘Obiter dictum’ does not have any binding effect as such observations are not conclusive in nature.

 

d. “It is not possible for Judges always to express their judgments so as to exclude entirely the risk that in some subsequent case their language may be misapplied.”

 

Therefore, I hope that the nature and the meaning of ‘obiter dictum’ is clear by now.