Back
2005 Supreme(MP) 580
2005(3) JLJ 166
R.V. Raveendran, C.J. and Shantanu Kemkar, J.
Bhagwati Prasad Singhal v. State of M.P. and another
Miscellaneous Petition No.4033 of 1993; Decided on 11 9.5.2005.
P.N. Dubey, Deputy Advocate General for respondent No. 1;
S.C. Sharma with Akash Mukherjee for respondent No.2.
Headnote:(1) Oaths Act, 1969--S.3(1) and 3(2)--oath and affirmation in respect of affidavits other than those to be used in judicial proceeding--no Judge or Magistrate is empowered unless specifically authorised by State Government under S. 3(2).
The petitioner, an Advocate and Notary, has filed this Public Interest Litigation seeking a direction to the respondents (State of Madhya Pradesh and the High Court of M.P.) to issue suitable directions to Judicial Magistrates not to administer oaths and affirmations in respect of affidavits meant for purposes other than judicial proceedings. He has contended that the power to administer oath in respect of affidavits other than those intended to be used in judicial proceedings, lies only with Notary Public or persons specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf; and that as Judicial Magistrates are not so empowered, they are not entitled to administer oath to such affidavits. [Para 1
Held: Sub-section (1) of section 3 empowers all Courts to administer oaths and affirmations in discharge of the duties imposed or in exercise of power conferred upon them by law. Sub-section (1) does not confer any power on Judges or Magistrates to administer oaths or affirmation in respect of affidavits which are not intended to be used in judicial proceedings. Sub-section (2) of section 3, however, authorizes the empowerment of any Court, Judge, Magistrate or person to administer oaths and affirmations for the purpose of affidavits by two authorities, that is, by the High Court in respect of affidavits for the purpose of judicial proceedings, and by the State Government in respect of other affidavits. Therefore, no Judge or Magistrate can claim power under section 3 to administer oath or affirmation in respect of affidavits to be used for purposes other than judicial proceedings, unless specifically empowered by the State Government. [Para 5
No Judge or Magistrate, in the absence of any power conferred by the State Government by notification under section 3(2) (b) of the Oaths Act, can administer oath or affirmation in regard to any affidavit which is meant for any purpose other than for Court/judicial proceedings. [Para 8
(2) Civil P.C., 1908--S.139--administration of oath in regard to affidavit for purposes of this Code--may be carried out by any Court or Magistrate, any notary, etc. [Para 2.1
(3) Criminal P.C., 1973--S. 297(1)--affidavit to be used before any Court under this Code--may be sworn or affirmed before any Judge, any Judicial or Executive Magistrate, Commissioner of oaths or any notary. [Para 2.2
(4) High Court Rules and Orders (M.P.)--Chap. III R. 1--affidavits to be used in High Court and Supreme Court--oath may be administered by Additional Deputy Registrar or by notary public -persons mentioned in CPC and CrPC may also administer the oath. [Para 2.3
(5) Notaries Act, 1952--S.8--notary appointed under--empowered to administer oath to any person or to take affidavit--he may also administer oath or affirmation of any affidavit not intended to be used in any proceeding of Court. [Para 3
(6) Oaths Act, 1969--S. 3(2) (a) - ‘judicial proceeding‘ is not defined in the Act-- general meaning is ‘proceeding in Court‘. [Para 4
(7) Criminal P.C., 1973--S.2(i)--‘judicial proceeding‘ as defined under--includes any proceeding in the course of which evidence is or may be legally taken on oath. [Para 4
(8) Words and Phrases - ‘judicial proceeding‘--is a proceeding the purpose of which is the ascertainment of some right or liability. [Para 4
¼1½ ‘kiFk vf/kfu;e] 1969& &/kkjk 3¼1½ rFkk 3¼2½&Ukf;d dk;Zokgh esa mi;ksx esa vkus okys ‘kiFki=ksa ds vfrfjDr ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk fnykuk rFkk çfrKku djkuk&Uk;k/kh‘k ;k eftLVªsV l‘kDr ugha tc rd fd jkT; ljdkj }kjk /kkjk 3¼2½ fofufnZ"Vr% çkf/kÑr ugha fd;k x;k gksA
;kph us] tks vf/koDrk vkSj uksVjh gS] çR;FkhZx.k ¼e/; çns‘k jkT; vkSj e-ç- mPp U;k;ky;½ }kjk U;kf;d eftLVªsVksa dks U;kf;d dk;Zokgh ls brj ç;kstuksa ds fy, vk‘kkf;r ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk ugha fnykus vkSj çfrKku ugha djkus ds mi;qDr funs‘k tkjh fd, tkus ds funs‘k dh bZIlk djrs gq, ;g yksd fgr eqdnek Qkby fd;k gSA mlus ladFku fd;k gS fd U;kf;d dk;Zokgh esa mi;ksx esa yk, tkus ds fy, vk‘kkf;r ‘kiFki=ksa ds vfrfjDr ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk fnykus dh ‘kfDr dsoy uksVjh ifCyd ;k jkT; ljdkj }kjk bl ckjs esa fo‘ks"kr% l‘kDr fd, x, O;fDr;ksa ds ikl gksrh gS( vkSj D;ksafd U;kf;d eftLVªsV bl çdkj l‘kDr ugha gSa] og ,sls ‘kiFki=ksa ij ‘kiFk fnykus ds gdnkj ugha gSaA ¼iSjk 1½
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk 1 esa lHkh U;k;ky;ksa dks mu ij fof/k }kjk vf/kjksfir drZO;ksa ds fuoZgu esa ;k çnÙk ‘kfDr ds ç;ksx }kjk ‘kiFk fnykus ;k çfrKku djkus ds fy, l‘kDr fd;k x;k gSA mi/kkjk ¼1½ esa U;k;k/kh‘kksa ;k eftLVªsVksa dks mu ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk fnykus ;k çfrKku djkus dh ‘kfDr çnÙk ugha dh xbZ ftudk U;kf;d dk;Zokgh esa mi;ksx vk‘kkf;r ugha gSA rFkkfi] /kkjk 3 dh mi/kkjk ¼2½ esa ‘kiFki=ksa ds ç;kstu ds fy, ‘kiFk fnykus vkSj çfrKku djkus ds fy, fdlh U;k;ky;] U;k;k/kh‘k] eftLVªsV ;k O;fDr dks nks çkf/kdkfj;ksa }kjk l‘kDr fd;k tkuk çkf/kÑr gS] vFkkZr U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ksa ds ç;kstu ds fy, ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa mPp U;k;ky; }kjk] rFkk vU; ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa jkT; ljdkj }kjkA vr% dksbZ Hkh U;k;k/kh‘k ;k eftLVªsV /kkjk 3 ds v/khu U;kf;d dk;Zokfg;ksa ls brj ç;kstuksa ds fy, mi;ksx fd, tkus okys ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk fnykus ;k çfrKku djkus dh ‘kfDr dk nkok ugha dj ldrk tc rd fd jkT; ljdkj }kjk fofufnZ"Vr% l‘kDr ugha fd;k x;k gksA ¼iSjk 5½
‘kiFk vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 3¼2½ ¼[k½ ds v/khu vf/klwpuk }kjk jkT; ljdkj }kjk çnÙk ‘kfDr ds vHkko esa dksbZ Hkh U;k;/kh‘k ;k eftLVªsV ,sls fdlh ‘kiFki= ds laca/k esa tks U;k;ky;hu@U;kf;d dk;Zokgh ls fHkUu fdlh ç;kstu ds fy, vk‘kkf;r gS] ‘kiFk ugha fnyk ldrk ;k çfrKku ugha djk ldrkA ¼iSjk 8½
¼2½ flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk] 1908& &/kkjk 139& &bl lafgrk ds ç;kstuksa ds fy, ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk&fdlh Hkh U;k;ky; ;k eftLVªsV] fdlh uksVjh vkfn }kjk fnykbZ tk ldrh gSA ¼iSjk 2-1½
¼3½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973& &/kkjk 139& &bl lafgrk ds ç;kstuksa ds fy, ‘kiFki=ksa ds laca/k esa ‘kiFk&fdlh Hkh U;k;ky; ;k eftLVªsV] fdlh uksVjh vkfn }kjk fnykbZ tk ldrh gSA ¼iSjk 2-1½
¼4½ mPp U;k;ky; fu;e rFkk vkns‘k ¼e-ç-½&v/;k; 3 fu-1&mPp U;k;ky; rFkk mPpre U;k;ky; esa mi;ksx esa yk, tkus okys ‘kiFki=&‘kiFk vij ;k fMIVh jftLVªkj }kjk vFkok uksVjh ifCayd }kjk fnykbZ tk ldrh gS&flfoy çfØ;k lafgrk rFkk naM çfØ;k lafgrk esa mfYyf[kr O;fDr Hkh ‘kiFk fnyk ldrs gSaA ¼iSjk 2-3½
¼5½ uksVjh vf/kfu;e] 1952& &/kkjk 8&ds v/khu fu;qDr uksVjh&fdlh Hkh O;fDr dks ‘kiFk fnykus ;k ‘kiFki= ysus esa l‘kDr gS&og ,sls fdlh ‘kiFki= ij Hkh ‘kiFk fnyk ldrk gS ;k çfrKku djk ldrk gS tks U;k;ky; dh fdlh dk;Zokgh esa mi;ksx ds fy, vk‘kf;r ugha gSA ¼iSjk 3½
¼6½ ‘kiFk vf/kfu;e] 1969&/kkjk 3¼2½ ¼d½&^U;kf;d dk;Zokgh*&vf/kfu;e esa ifjHkkf"kr ugha&lk/kkj.k vFkZ gS ^U;k;ky; esa gksus okyh dk;Zokgh*A ¼iSjk 4½
¼7½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973& &/kkjk 2¼>½&ds v/khu ;Fkk ifjHkkf"kr ^U;kf;d dk;Zokgh*&,slh dksbZ Hkh dk;ZOkkgh lfEefyr gS ftlds vuqØe esa lk{; ‘kiFk ij fy;k tkrk gS ;k fof/kd :i ls fy;k tk ldrk gSA ¼iSjk 4½
¼8½ ‘‘kCn rFkk okD;&^U;kf;d dk;ZOkkgh*&,slh dk;Zokgh gS ftldk ç;kstu fdlh vf/kdkj ;k nkf;Ro dk vfHkfu‘p;u gSA ¼iSjk 4½
Raveendran, C.J.--1. The petitioner, an Advocate and Notary, has filed this Public Interest Litigation seeking a direction to the respondents (State of Madhya Pradesh and the High Court of M.P.) to issue suitable directions to Judicial Magistrates not to administer oaths and affirmations in respect of affidavits meant for purposes other than judicial proceedings. He has contended that the power to administer oath in respect of affidavits other than those intended to be used in judicial proceedings, lies only with Notary Public or persons specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf; and that as Judicial Magistrates are not so empowered, they are not entitled to administer oath to such affidavits.
2. We may first refer to the relevant provisions of law bearing on the issue.
2.1. Section 139 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for short) provides as to who should administer oath in regard to affidavits for purposes of the said Code. It reads thus :
"In the case of any affidavit under this Code:
(a) any Court or Magistrate, or
(aa) any notary appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952; or
(b) any officer or other person, whom a High Court may appoint in this behalf; or
(c) any officer appointed by any other Court which the State Government has generally or specifically empowered in that behalf, may administer the oath to the deponent."
2.2. Similarly section 297 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, ('CrPC' for short) enumerates the persons before whom affidavits may be sworn. Sub-section (l) of section 297 which is relevant reads thus:
"Affidavits to be used before any Court under this Code may be sworn or affirmed before-
(a) any Judge or any Judicial or Executive Magistrate, or
(b) any Commissioner of Oaths appointed by a High Court or Court of Session, or
(c) any notary appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952.
2.3. The Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules and Orders, also contain a provision as to who is empowered to administer oath in regard to affidavits to be used in the High Court and Supreme Court. Rule 1 of Chapter III of the said Rules and Orders is extracted below :
"The Additional Registrar or Deputy Registrar, a notary public appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952, and other persons mentioned in section 539 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and section 139 of the Code of Civil Procedure, are persons empowered to administer the oath or receive the solemn affirmation in the case of affidavits to be used in this Court and the Supreme Court."
[Note: Section 539 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 referred in the said rule corresponds to section 297 of the Criminal Procedure Code.]
2.4. It is clear from the above provisions that they relate to and provide for only administration of oath or affirmation in respect of affidavits to be used in proceedings before the Courts covered by the Civil Procedure Code or Criminal Procedure Code, as also the High Court and the Supreme Court. They do not enable or empower any one, in particular Judges or Judicial Magistrates to administer oath or affirmation in respect of affidavits which are not intended to be used in proceedings before Courts.
3. The Notaries Act, 1952 was enacted with the object of empowering Central and State Governments to appoint notaries not only for the limited purposes of the Negotiable Instruments Act, but generally for all recognized notarial purposes. Section 8 of the Notaries Act deals with the functions of notaries and provides that a notary may do all or any of the following acts by virtue of his office.
(a) Verify, authenticate, certify, or attest the execution of any instrument;
(b) to (d) ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....;
(e) administer oath to, or take affidavit from, any person;
(f), (h), (ha), (hb) .... .... .... .... .... ....;
(i) any other act which may be prescribed.
Thus a notary appointed under the Notaries Act is empowered to I administer oath to any person or take affidavit from any person. This would necessarily include admin
