Every judgment is not meant to be a binding precedent, says the Supreme Court (SC) in NBCC (India) ltd. v The State of West Bengal & Others [2025 INSC 54].
The SC added that the High Courts and Trial Courts often face difficulties in distinguishing between whether a decision is meant for resolution between the parties, or intended to be set as a precedent binding on them, particularly when the SC declared that even an obiter of it must be treated as a binding precedent for the High Courts and the courts below.
Therefore, the SC judgment should specify whether the decision is intended just to resolve a specific dispute between the parties or to establish a binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution.
The SC performs the twin functions of decision-making in every case, and precedent-making in some cases. Every judgment or order made by the SC in disposing of appeals is not intended to be a binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution.
References
- NBCC (India) ltd. v The State of West Bengal & Others [2025 INSC 54]
