ivil Appeal No 2377 of 1987
From the Judgment and Order dated 29101986 of the Allahabad High Court in FA No 493 of 1984
JP Goyal Rajesh and VK Verma for the Appellant
Mrs Rani Chhabra for the Respondent
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATACHALIAH J
This appeal in a matrimonial cause is by the husband and is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 29101986 of High Court of Allahabad in First Appeal No 493 of 1984 allowing the Respondent wife s appeal and reversing the decree of dissolution of marriage dated 3171984 granted by the Second Additional District Judge Jhansi in Original Suit No 34 of 1983 of his file
Appellant s suit for a decree of dissolution of his marriage with the respondent on the ground envisaged in Section 131iii of the Act that respondent suffered from a mental disorder of such a kind that rendered Respondent unfit for married life and that petitioner could not reasonably be expected to live with her had been decreed by the Court of first instance but dismissed by the High Court in appeal
Appellant husband has come up by Special Leave
The marriage between appellant Ram Narain Gupta and respondent Rameshwari Gupta was solemnised on 1761979 at Jhansi
The suit for the dissolution of the marriage was filed on 1471983 on the allegation that the wife was a schizophrenic
The High Court while holding it probable that the wife did suffer from some such mental disorder however was persuaded to the view that appellant had not established the requisite extent and degree of the mental disorder recognised by law as constituting a legal justification for the dissolution of the marriage
In the suit appellant had also alleged that the respondent was of PG NO 916 unsound mind even before the marriage and that this fact had been concealed from him at the time of the marriage
This alternative case that the marriage was itself induced by the suppression of the material facts pertaining to the mental state of the bride and that accordingly the marriage required to be annuled was however not pressed before the High Court
In his suit appellant pleaded that the respondent suffered from a mental disorder psychiatrically recognised as schizophrenia  which was of such severeity as to render Respondent unsociable and given to violent propensities that the wife had been treated by the doctors at the Department of Psychiatry at the Medical College Jhansi and that despite competent professional treatment the mental condition of respondent continued to deteriorate to the point of making manifest in her suicidal tendencies and aggressive violent behaviour towards others
Appellant therefore averred that the mental disorder of the respondent was of such a kind and to such extent that appellant could not reasonably be expected to live with respondent as man and wife
Respondent in her written statement denied the imputation of insanity and commission of several overt acts indicative of mental disorder alleged against her and contended that appellant s determination to get rid of her was attributable to the domestic discord between her on the one side and the mother and sisters of the appellant on the other
Indeed she also entered the witness box to testify to and substantiate her defence
She was subjected to searching cross examination 
The Trial Court framed the necessary and material issues stemming from the pleadings
On his side appellant called a certain Dr Ganesh Datt Shukla PW
l Head of the Diptt
of Psychiatry
Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical College to support his version
Appellant himself tendered evidence as PW 2
He also examined a certain Gyasi Ram PW 3 said to be an artisan who claimed that during one of his visits to appellant s house for some odd job
he had seen respondent beating up small children and conducting herself in a disorderly manner
Appellant also called a certain Janki Prasad PW 4 said to be the private home teacher of appellant s nephews
PW 4 spoke to what according to him were oddities in the behaviour of the respondent and of her violent propensities
Appellant in order to show that Respondent was a violent lunatic relied upon the medical certificates at Exhibits P3 P4 and A2 the first two issued by PW 1 and the third by a certain Dr
SA Khan
PG NO 917 Appellant also relied upon certain incidents which occurred on 171983 in which the respondent is alleged to have exhibited unprovoked violence towards appellant s sisters and inflicted injuries on their person
The respondent wife as stated earlier tendered evidence as D W 1
She also produced a copy of the order passed by the Magistrate in proceedings under the Lunacy Act initiated by the appellant for her committal to a mental asylum
In those proceedings it would appear the Magistrate after examining the respondent is stated have found no abnormality in her requiring institutionalised treatment
The trial court on an appreciation of the evidence accepted appellant s case and recorded a finding that respondent was afflicted with schizophrenia which was dangerous for her as well as for those who lived with her and granted a decree for the dissolution of the marriage
This decree as stated earlier has been reversed by the High Court
The point that commended itself to the High Court was that though the evidence indicated the possibility of some mental disorder however the requirement of the law as to the existence of the requisite degree and the nature of the disorder that could alone justify a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the appellant that he could not live with the respondent wife had not been established
This implied that the High Court partly accepted the appellant s case that respondent did suffer from a mental disorder which in this case was described as schizophrenia
The High Court stated The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant remained under the treatment of the psychiatrist Dr GD Shukla in Maharani Laxmi Bai Medical College Jhansi
1 and 2 are the prescription and discharge certificates issued by Dr GD Shukla Ext
4 is the medical certificate dated 1851983 which was issued by Dr Shukla in which he certified that the defendant suffered from schizophrenia since 26th March 1983
There is no counter certificate of any expert from the side of the defendant
I therefore do not see any cogent reason to brush aside this certificate of Dr GD Shukla who examined himself as PW1
 The High Court proceeded to refer to certain medical literature on schizophrenia  and felt pursuaded to the view PG NO 918 that having regard to the various kinds of schizophrenia or rather the various ways in which that mental illness is known to manifest itself it would be necessary for the appellant to go further and establish the degree and severity of the mental illness which would alone satisfy the requirement of the ground for dissolution of marriage envisaged in Section 131iii of the Act
In substance the High Court held that appellant had not shown that the mental illness of the wife was of such a kind and intensity as to justify a reasonable apprehension that it would not be possible or safe for appellant to live with the respondent
The High Court posited the proposition which required its consideration thus So it is only when the schizophrenia is of the third variety ie catatonia that the patient is in a state of wild excitement destructive violent and abusive
Let us see whether the defendant suffers from schizophrenia and whether there is any unassailable and cogent evidence to establish that the schizophrenia is of third variety namely catatonia when the patient becomes destructive wild and abusive
 Dealing with this High Court noticed what according to it were certain shifts in emphasis in the two certificates Exhibit 4 dated noticed 1851983 and Exhibit 3 dated 271983 issued by PW 1
High Court that while the earlier certificate dated 1851983 did not contain any specific reference to the severity of the disease or to the violent propensities attributed to respondent which tended to endanger safety of others the later certificate dated 271983 how ever sought to supply this element
The High Court allow noticed certain events of 171983 in the wake of which the certificate Exhibit 3 dated 271983 came into existence
High Court referred to the evidence on record which disclosed that at 1145 AM on 17
1983 respondent wife had lodged the first information as per Exhibit 11 with the jurisdictional police complaining that she had been assaulted first by her husband s nephew and then by the members of the family of the appellant
She also had occasion to complain that appellant s mother sisters etc
had threatened to extinguish respondent s life by setting her ablaze
The attempt on the part of the appellant the High Court noticed to commit her to an asylum was made on the PG NO 919 very next day viz 2783
The medical certificate ex
3 is also of that date
The Magistrate who was moved by the appellant under the provisions of the Lunacy Act rejected the application observing that respondent whom he had occasion to examine talked in a sensible manner and is not at all hostile
 Referring to the setting in which Dr Shukla s PW 1 certificate dated 271983 was required to be appreciated the High Court observed  The second certificate Ext 3 by Dr GD Shukla dated 2nd July 1983 has to be seen in the sequence of the above events
There is nothing on record to show that the defendant lodged false report with the police in the morning of 1st July 1983 against the plaintiff inter alia
It is after the said report was lodged the plaintiff made efforts to collect all the evidence with the aim of sending the defendant to the mental asylum and filed the suit for dissolution of marriage by the decree of divorce
The above evidence were collected in quick succession
Keeping in view the above events the reliability of the second medical certificate ext 3 dated 271983 has to be tested    
Neither in the first certificate Ext 4 nor in the second certificate Ext 3 Dr GD Shukla stated that the schizophrenia the defendant is suffering from was of the third variety namely Catatona when the patient becomes wild destructive and violent
In this statement also Dr G 
Shukla PW 1 does not state that the schizophrenia was of Catatonia variety
He does not say even a word about the danger arising from the mental disorder of the defendant
The certificate Ext
3 does not bear the thumb impression or signature of the defendant and therefore it cannot be said with certainty that the said certificate was issued by Dr GD Shukla after having examined the defendant
The High Court also evaluated the evidence of PW 3  4 and pointed out the intrinsic improbabilities of the evidence and the consequent unacceptability of their versions
The High Court in particular noticed that PW 4 in his cross examination expressed total inability to give description of the defendant s Physique ie her complexion height etc
 The High Court observed PG NO 920  
The inability of this witness in giving the physical description of the defendant shows that his entire statement is tutored one
This is the state of affairs of the evidence of the plaintiff
The High Court also referred to the respondent s grievance that the environment of hostility and harassment to which she was subjected by appellant s parent and sisters etc
had taken its toll and rendered her apprehensive and irritable
High Court observed  
Cruelty inflicted by the in laws culminated in the first information report which the defendant lodged in the morning of 1st July 1983 for which no convincing evidence has been given by the plaintiff that the said report was false and that was filed by the defendant without any grave provocation
The case of the defendant is that the ill treatment extended to her by her in laws throughout right from the time of marriage told upon her mental state and she became very irritable and apprehensive
The case of the defendant has to be seen in this background
 Concluding the High Court said    
I accept the contention of learned counsel for the defendant appellant that the decree of the divorce cannot be sustained as the plaintiff failed to adduce any evidence that could prove beyond reasonable doubt that the mental disorder of the defendant was of such a kind and to such an extent that the plaintiff cannot live safely with the defendant 8
Shri Goel learned senior counsel appearing in support of the appeal assailed the correctness of the approach of and the conclusions reached by the High Court
Learned counsel submitted that the High Court having on the basis of overwhelming medical evidence rightly accepted that part of the appellant s case that the respondent did suffer from schizophrenia  however fell into an error in weighing the possible manifestation of that insidious disease in golden scales and in its conclusion that appellant could yet live with her
Learned counsel submitted that if the evidence of the conduct of the respondent is assessed in the background of the fact that she was a confirmed schizophrenic  there would be no room for any PG NO 921 speculative allowance to be made for any possibility of any alternative hypothesis for that behaviour
Learned counsel submitted that in assessing the reasonableness of the apprehension of the husband that he could not be expected to spend the rest of his life with a schizophrenic  due acknowledgment had to be made to the subjective susceptibilities of the husband also
Rani Chhabra for the respondent however soughtto support the judgment under appeal
The point however to note is that Section 131iii does not make the mere existence of a mental disorder of any degree sufficient in law to justify the dissolution of a marriage
Section 131iii provides Sec 13
Divorce 1 Any marriage solemnised whether before or after the commencement of this Act may on a petition presented by either the husband or the wife be dissolved by a decree of divorce on the ground that the other party i  ii  Omitted as unnecessary iii has been incurably of unsound mind or has been suffering continuously or intermittently from mental disorder of such a kind and to such an extent that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent
Explanation In this clause a the expression mental disorder means mental illness arrested or incomplete development of mind psychopathic disorder or any other disorder or disability of mind and includes schizophrenia b Omitted as unnecessary
Emphasis Supplied 10
The context in which the ideas of unsoundness of mind  and mental disorder  occur in the section as grounds for dissolution of a marriage require the assessment of the degree of the mental dis order
Its degree must be such as PG NO 922 that the spouse seeking relief cannot reasonably be expected to live with the other
All mental abnormalities are not recognised as grounds for grant of Decree
If the mere existence of any degree of mental abnormality could justify dissolution of a marriage few marriages would indeed survive in law
The answer to the apparently simple and perhaps misleading question as to who is normal runs inevitably into philosophical thickets of the concept of mental normalcy and as involved therein of the mind  itself
These concepts of mind  mental phenomena  etc are more known than understood and the theories of mind and menton do not indicate any internal consistency let alone validity of their basic ideas
Theories of mind  with cognate ideas of perception  and consciousness  encompass a wide range of thoughts more ontological than epistemological
Theories of mental phenomena are diverse and include the dualist concept shared by Descartes and Sigmund Freud of the separateness of the existence of the physical or the material world as distinguished from the non material mental world with its existence only spatially and not temporally
There is again the theory which stresses the neurological basis of the mental phenomenon  by asserting the functional correlation of the neuronal arrangements of the brain with mental phenomena
The behaviourist  tradition on the other hand interprets all reference to mind as constructs  out of behaviour
Functionalism however seems to assert that mind is the logical or functional state of physical systems
But all theories seem to recognise in varying degrees that the psychometric control over the mind operates at a level not yet fully taught to science
When a person is oppressed by intense and seemingly insoluble moral dilemmas or when grief of loss of dear ones etch away all the bright colours of life or where a broken marriage brings with it the loss of emotional security what standards of normalcy of behaviour could be formulated and applied The arcane infallibility of science has not fully pervaded the study of the non material dimensions of being 
Speaking of the indisposition of science towards this study a learned author says 
We have inherited cultural resistence to treating the conscious mind as a biological phenomenon like any other
This goes back to Descartes in the seventeenth century
Descartes divided the world into two kinds of sub stances mental substances and physical substances
Physical PG NO 923 substances were the proper domain of science and mental substances were the property of religion
Something of an acceptance of this division exists even to the present day
So for example consciousness and subjectivity are often regarded as unsuitable topics for science
And this reluctance to deal with consciousness and subjectivity is part of a persistent objectifying tendency
People think science must be about objectively observable phenomena
On occasions when I have lectured to audiences of biologists and neurophysiologists I have found many of them very reluctant to treat the mind in general and consciousness in particular as a proper domain of scientific investigation   the use of the noun mind  is dangerously inhabited by the ghosts of old philosophical theories
It is very difficult to resist the idea that the mind is a kind of a thing or at least an arena or at least some kind of black box in which all of these mental processes occur See John Searle Minds Brains And Science 1984 Reith Lectures p 10  l l Lord Wilberforce referring to the psychological basis of physical illness said that the area of ignorance of the body mind relation seems to expand with that of knowledge
In McLoughlin vs O Brian  1983 1 Law Reports 410 at 418 the learned Lord said though in a different context  
Whatever is unknown about the mind body relationship and the area of ignorance seems to expand with that of knowledge it is now accepted by medical science that recognisable and severe physical damage to the human body and system may be caused by the impact through the senses of external events on the mind
There may thus be produced what is as identifiable an illness as any that may be caused by direct physical impact
It is safe to say that this in general terms is understood by the ordinary man or woman who is hypothesised by the courts But the illnesses that are called mental  are kept distinguished from those that ail the body  in a fundamental way
In Philosophy and Medicine Vol 5 at PG NO 924 page X the learned Editor refers to what distinguishes the two qualitatively 
Undoubtedly mental illness is so disvalued because it strikes at the very roots of our personhood
It visits us with uncontrollable fears obsessions compulsions and anxieties    
This is captured in part by the language we use in describing the mentally ill
One is an hysteric is a neurotic is an obsessive is a schizophrenic is a manic depressive
On the other hand one has heart disease has cancer has the flu has malaria has smallpox   emphasis supplied 12 Schizophrenia  it is true is said to be difficult mental affliction
It is said to be insidious in its onset and has hereditary pre disposing factor
It is characterized by the shallowness of emotions and is marked by a detachment from reality
In paranoid states the victim responds even to fleeting expressions of disapproval from others by disproportionate reactions generated by hallucinations of persecution
Even well meant acts of kindness and of expression of sympathy appear to the victim as insidious traps
In its worst manifes tation this illness produces a crude wrench from reality and brings about a lowering of the higher mental functions
Schizophrenia is described thus A severe mental disorder or group of disorders charac terized by a disintegration of the process of thinking of contact with reality and of emotional responsiveness
Delusions and hallucinations especially of voices are usual features and the patient usually feels that his thoughts sensations and actions are controlled by or shared with others
He becomes socially withdrawn and loses energy and initiative
The main types of schizophrenia are simple in which increasing social withdrawal and personal ineffectiveness are the major changes hebephrenic which starts in adolescence or young adulthood see hebephrenia paranoid characterized by prominent delusion and catatonic with marked motor disturbances See catatonia
PG NO 925 Schizophrenia commonly but not inevitably runs a progressive course
The prognosis has been improved in recent years with drugs such as phenothiazines and by vigorous psychological and social management and rehabilitation
There are strong genetic factors in the causation and environmental stress can precipitate illness See Concise Medical Dictionary at page 566 Oxford Medical Publications 1980 But the point to note and emphasise is that the personality disintegration that characterises this illness may be of varying degrees
Not all schzophrenics are characterised by the same intensity of the disease
FC Redlich  Daniel X Freedman in The Theory and Practice of Psychiatry  1966 Edn say   
Some schizophrenic reactions which we call psychoses may be relatively mild and transient others may not interfere too seriously with many aspects of everyday living   p 252 Are the characteristic remissions and relapses expressions of endogenous processes or are they responses to psychosocial variables or both Some patients recover apparently completely when such recovery occurs without treatment we speak of spontaneous remission
The term need not imply an indpendent endogenous process it is just as likely that the spontaneous remission is a response to nondeliberate but none the less favourable psychosocial stimuli other than specific therapeutic activity   p 465 Emphasis Supplied 13
The reasoning of the High Court is that the requisite degree of the mental disorder which alone would justify dissolution of the marriage has not been established
This it seems to us to be not an unreasonable assessment of the situation strong arguments of the Sri Goel to the contrary notwithstanding
The High Court referred to and relied upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Smt
Rita Roy vs Sitesh Chandra AIR 1982 Cal 138
In that case the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court observed PG NO 926   each case of schizophrenia has to be considered on its own merits    
According to the aforesaid clause iii two elements are necessary to get a decree
The party concerned must be of unsound mind or intermittently suffering from schizophrenia or mental disorder
At the same time that disease must be of such a kind and of such an extent that the other party cannot reasonably be expected to live with her
So only one element of that clause is insufficient to grant a decree 
 Considering the evidence in that case the High Court reached the conclusion  
We are clearly of the opinion that she only has slight mental disorder and she has been suffering intermittently from the same
But after considering the totality of the evidence and the impact on the husband we must hold that such mental disorder is not of such a kind and to such an extent that the husband cannot reasonably be expected to live with her within the meaning of the second portion of clause iii of Sec
131 of the Act   We approve this approach of the High Court of Calcutta
Indeed the following observations of Ormrod J in Bennett vs Bennett with reference to mental disorder  in Section 4 of the Mental Health Act 1959 are opposite in the context of Sec
131iii of the Act    
Now the definition of mental disorder  in sec
4 of the Mental Health Act 1959 is in very wide language indeed
It includes mental illness arrested or incomplete development of mind psychopathic disorder and any other disorder or disability of mind and so for the moment to turn to medical language it clearly includes or one would suppose it clearly includes not only psychotic illness but neurotic illnesses as well and thus begins by enormously enlarging the field
The way in which this very large field is cut down in the Act of 1965 section 91b is by the use of this phrase of such a kind or to such an extent as to be unfitted for marriage and the procreation of children
 PG NO 927 The burden of proof of the existence of the requisite degree of mental disorder is on the spouse basing the claim on that state of facts
Indeed the caution of a learned author against too readily giving a name to a thing is worth recalling Giving something a name seems to have a deadening influence upon all our relations to it
It brings matter to a finality
Nothing further seems to need to be done
The disease has been identified
The necessity for further understanding of it has ceased to exist
 See The Auto biography of a purpose William Alanson White New York Double day  Co 1938 p 53 It is precisely for this reason that a learned authority on mental health saw wisdom in eschewing the mere choice of words and the hollowness they would bring with them
He said I do not use the word schizophrenia  because I do not think any such disease exists 
I know it means widely different things to different people
With a number of other psychiatrists I hold that the words neurosis  psychoneurosis  psychopathic personality  and the like are similarly valueless
I do not use them and I try to prevent my students from using them although the latter effort is almost futile once the psychiatrist discovers how conveniently ambiguous these terms really are   In general we hold that mental illness should be thought and spoken of less in terms of disease entities than in terms of personality disorganization
We can precisely define organization and disorganization we cannot precisely define disease   Of course one can describe a manic  or a depressed  or a schizophrenic  constellation of symptoms but what is most important about this constellation in each case Not we think its curious external form but rather what it indicates in regard to the process of disorganization and reorganization of a personality which is in a fluctuant state of attempted adjustment to environmental reality
Is the imbalance increasing or decreasing To what is the stress related What psychological factors are accessible to external modification What latent capacities for PG NO 928 satisfaction in work play love creativity are discoverable for therapeutic planning And this is language that can be understood
It is practical language and not language of incantation and exorcism  Emphasis Supplied See Karl Menninger Communication and Mental Health The Menninger Quarterly 1962 p 1 Readings in Law and Psychiatry Richard C Allen Elyce Zenott Ferster Jessee C Rubin Revised  Expanded Edn 1975 page 38
This medical concern against too readily reducing a human being into a functional non entity and as a negative unit in family or society is law s concern also and is reflected at least partially in the requirements of Section 131iii
In the last analysis the mere branding of a person as schizophrenic will not suffice
For purposes of Section 131iii schizophrenia  is what Schizophrenia does
The appeal is dismissed
There will be no order as to costs
GN Appeal dismissed


Summary:
On February 21 1986 the State Government of Maharashtra appointed Shri Justice B Lentin as a one man Commission of Inquiry to probe into the death of 14 patients in the government run JJB Hospital between 2211986 and 721986 after they were administered contaminated glycerol and to fix responsibility
The inquiry revealed the existence of a corrupt and venal nexus between the drug firms the delinquent Food  Drugs Administration and hospital staff on the one hand and the appellant some other persons and certain Government officials on the other
The Commission s report was an indictment of the State s public health system
The Commission having found the evidence given by the appellant self contradictory issued a show cause notice to him as to why he should not be prosecuted for the offence of giving false evidence on oath under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 read with section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
After considering the appellant s objections the Commission directed filing of a complaint under sections 193 and 228 of IPC
The appellant filed a petition in the High Court assailing the legality and propriety of the order of the Commission directing filing of the complaint and the same was dismissed by the High Court
Before this Court it was contended on behalf of the appellant that 1 the Commission could not be deemed to be a Court for the purposes of section 1951b of the Code of Criminal Procedure unless declared by the Commission of Inquiries Act itself as stipulated in sub section
3 of section 195 PG NO 942 PG NO 943 which provides that in cl
b of sub section
1 the term Court  means a Civil Revenue or Criminal Court and includes a tribunal constituted by or under a Central Provincial or State Act if declared by that Act to be a Court for the purposes of this Section 2 the Commission of Inquiry appointed by the State Government was merely a fact finding body appointed by the Government for the information of its mind  and the mere fact that the procedure adopted was of a legal character and it had the power to administer an oath would not impart to it the status of the Court and therefore was not a Court  for the purposes of section 1951b of the Code 3 the question was not whether the appellant could be prosecuted for perjury for giving false evidence which was an offence punishable under section 1951b but whether the Commission was a Court  for the purposes of section 1951b 4 that sub section to put an end to the controversy and this was nothing but legislative declaration of the law  contrary to the law declared by this Court in Lalj Haridas case and a number of statutes contain such a provision in accordance with the existing legislative practice
The Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State contended that 1 the inclusive part of the definition of Court  in section 1953 of the Code was ex abundanti cautela and was merely declaratory of the law and 2 the first part of sub section
4 of section 5 of the Act satisfied the requirements of the inclusive part of the definition of Court  as contained in sub section
3 of section 195 of the Code
Allowing the appeal it was HELD 1 It could not be doubted that sub section
3 of section 195 of the Code had been enacted by Parliament to implement the recommendations of the 41st Report of the Law Commission to remedy the uncertain state of law due to conflict of opinion between different High Courts as to the meaning of the word Court  in section 1951b and to that extent the introduction of the inclusive clause in the definition of Court  in sub section
3 of section 195 had brought about a change in the law
966D 2 Law must be definite and certain
If any of the features of the law could usefully be regarded as normative it was such basic postulates as to the requirement of consistency in judicial decision making
It was this requirement of consistency that gave to the law much of its rigour
At the same time there was need for flexibility968F G 3 A Commission of Inquiry was fictionally a Civil PG NO 944 Court for the limited purpose of proceeding under section 482 of the old Code or section 345 of the present Code
A fortiori the legal fiction contained in sub section
5 of section of the Act which related to the proceedings before the Commission was necessarily confined to offences that were punishable under sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code and did not extend beyond that
970F G 4 A Commission of Inquiry was not a Court properly so called
A Commission is obviously appointed by the appropriate Government for the information of its mind  in order for it to decide as to the course of action to be followed
It was therefore a fact finding body and was not required to adjudicate upon the rights of the parties and has no adjudicatory function
The Government was not bound to accept its recommendation or act upon its findings
The mere fact that the procedure adopted by it was of a legal character and it had the power to administer an oath would not impart to it the status of a Court
972D E 5 Parliament in its wisdom whenever thought it fit had inserted a special provision for deeming a tribunal to be a Court for the purposes of section 1951b but had left the other enactments like the Commission of Inquiry Act untouched although sub section
3 of section 195 had been on the Statute Book for the last over 14 years
965D E 6 The judgment will not however prevent the State Government from launching a prosecution against the appellant for commission of the alleged offences under sections 193 and 228 IPC if otherwise permissible in law
977E F Lalji Haridas vs The State of Maharashtra   MV Rajwade vs Dr SM Hasan ILR 1954 Nagpur 1 Brajnanandan Sinha vs Jyoti Narain   Puhupram  Ors
vs State of Madhya Pradesh  Balakrishnan vs Income Tax Officer Ernakulam  Jagannath Prasad vs State of Uttar Pradesh  Virinder Kumar Satyawadi vs The State of Punjab  Balwant Singh  Anr
vs LC Bharupal ITO New Delhi  Chandrapal Singh vs Maharaj Singh  Bengal Immunity Co Ltd vs Union State of Bihar  R MD Chamarbaugwalla vs Union of India   Commissioner of Income tax Madhya Pradesh  Bhopal vs Sodra Devi 1958 SCR l St Aubyn vs Attorney General   Shell Co of Australia vs Federal Commissioner of Taxation  Smt
Ujjam Bai vs State of Uttar Pradesh  MM khan vs Emperor ILR and In re
Maharaja Madhava Singh LR 1905 31 IA 239
PG NO 945