In Matters of Law, Words Are of Indispensable Importance: Supreme Court Slams Poor Translation of Trial Court Judgment

“Every Word, Every Comma Has Legal Consequence—Translation Must Preserve the Spirit of Original Judgment”: In a strongly worded rebuke, the Supreme Court of India expressed serious displeasure over the inaccurate and poorly rendered English translation of a civil court judgment, warning that such errors pose a direct threat to the administration of justice.

Delivering its decision in Zoharbee & Anr. v. Imam Khan (D) Thr. LRs. & Ors., the Bench comprising Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra remarked that linguistic precision is not a procedural formality but a substantive necessity in judicial work. The Court noted that the translated version of the lower court's decision lacked the clarity and legal fidelity required for proper appellate review, thereby creating potential for misinterpretation of factual and legal findings.

“In matters of law, words are of indispensable importance. Each word, every comma has an impact on the overall understanding of the matter. Due care has to be taken to ensure that the true meaning and spirit of the words in the original language are translated into English for the Courts in appeal to comprehend what had transpired below.”

This observation came in the context of a property dispute governed by Mohammedan Law, where the appellate courts had to rely upon the translated judgment of the trial court. The Bench found that the deficiencies in translation significantly undermined the ability of the appellate court to grasp the rationale behind the trial court’s decision, thereby obstructing the appellate process.

The Court emphasized that in a multilingual legal system like India’s—where proceedings in subordinate courts often take place in regional languages—the responsibility of accurate, context-sensitive translation into English is fundamental, especially for scrutiny at the appellate and constitutional levels.

The judges further drew attention to a recently flagged concern in another case, Chairman Managing Committee & Anr. v. Bhaveshkumar Manubhai Parakhia & Anr. (Order dated 18 March 2025), where a coordinate bench had similarly criticised poor translation practices and stressed the necessity for institutional reform in this area.

“Just recently, a Co-ordinate Bench also highlighted similar concern… We may only underscore the observations made therein.”

By reiterating the need for linguistic accuracy, the Court implicitly called for systemic changes to translation protocols within judicial infrastructure, including better training, accountability, and perhaps professional certification of court translators.

In doing so, the Supreme Court has sent a clear message to judicial institutions across the country that flawed translations are not merely technical errors—they are impediments to justice. The ruling highlights the fundamental principle that the integrity of legal reasoning cannot survive without the integrity of legal language.

D.D. 16 October 2025