In criminal cases judgment without arguments is infirm.

its good knowledge which you have provided but pragmatically it is not possible for judge/magistrate to reflect all details in judgement and generally they only record contentions which already on merits of a case/suit.

thank you

Docket Sheet in a Murder case shows that there was argument but not even a word had been stated in the judgment about the same but there was various substantial question of law binding on Trial Court under Article 141 of Constituion of India which was not raised by prosecution or shown to be raised by prosecution and Trial Court also failed to do which resulted in miscarriage of justice to victim family, whether this would be a ground for interference in revision filed by victim against the order of acquittal to remand the case to write fresh judgment by hearing the parties.

Whether is it possible to avoid this judgment, because it clealry expresseed in this judgment which is binding on Lower Court under Article 141 of Constituion of India.

Further will it not violate Fundamental rights of Victim and further judicial discipline that under Article 141 of Constituion of India which clearly states that  Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts.

This observation of Court is not merely orbita dicta or mere observation but it is sold principle on the foundation of judcial reasoning and further judicial discipline. 

Root cause of all the problem is that there is no correct application of law because of incompetent prosecution and other corrupt means of prosecution and non observation of judicial discipline by Trial Courts and even by High Court.  

The fault lies in the prosecution and the defence as well and I don't think the trial court has done any contra to the judicial procedure.Could be a possibility that the prosecutor and the defence council are responsible  for weaking the accused's involvement in the related crime.

Docket sheets shows arguments heard but nothing is stated about it in the judgment, what does it signify? The above case law also says that "The judgment does not disclose as to what was argued before it on behalf of the prosecution  and  the  defence.  The  judgment  is  so infirm"

"When arguments were heard what was it heard"

Moreover what about the significance of Section 234 and 235 of CrPC and more over fundamental right of victim family under Article 21 of Constituion of India, who are psychologically damamged.

When Fundamental rights is extended to include even Right to reputation but will the un merited acquittal coupled with brutal murder will not irreperably damage psychologically and emotionally will not be judicially noticeable as not only fundamental right of accused invovled but also more importantly fundamental right of victim who faced this pain for no mistake of them.

Hence will the court not interfere in noting the inconsistency statement regarding arguments heard in the docket sheet and non mentioning in judgment anything about the arguments, not even a single word had been exressesed about it. Will this act not infringe fundamental right of victim under Article 21 of Constituion of India and coupled with constituional provision Article 141 of Constitution of Inida. 

Only brief sentences regarding arguments from both the sides are mentioned in the judgement order and not in detail.

Even that was not mentioned is the judgment of Trial Court and further because of this there was overlooking of various material evidence, overlooking of statutory law, over looking law declared by Supreme Court which was constituionally binding on Trial Court which would have material bearing on channg the decision of case causing serious miscarriage of justice to victim family and it has altogether damaged them psychologically and emotinally and altogether made their life maening less and deadly.  

and even there was suppression of material evidence, truth and altogether justice is burried. 

Well the option left is to appeal against the verdict of the trial court.Retrial again is not possible.

The above Supreme Court judgment cited is against the concurrent findings of acquital passed by Trail Court as well as High Court, in which court after observing the infirmity gave direction as below

"The  case  needs  to  be  remanded  to  the  trial Court for its fresh disposal by writing a fresh judgment in accordance  with  law"

so, with this preposition is it possible in the appeal remedy u suggested to get order from the Appealte Court for remand of case to trial court for writing fresh judgment. 

Yes could be possible with the SC directions.