A split verdict occurs when a bench of judges is unable to reach an unanimous decision in a case.
Split verdicts can arise when there are differences in interpretation of law, conflicting opinions on the evidence, or simply a lack of agreement among the members of the bench.
Split verdicts can only happen when the bench has an even number of judges. After the split verdict, the case is heard by a larger bench afresh.
Examples:
- Sabarimala Temple Case: It was a 4:1 split verdict where the majority of the bench believed that exclusion of women from temple worship is unconstitutional. The dissenting judge believed that the practice was a matter of faith and should be left to the believers.
- Aadhaar Case: The bench dealt with constitutionality of the Aadhaar card. In a 4: 1 split verdict, majority upheld constitutionality of the Aadhaar while the dissenting judge opined that it violated the right to privacy and should be struck down.
