Report No. 69

V. Section 57(2) tO 57(6)

21.43. Section 57(2)-Change recommended.-

Section 57(2) requires the court to take judicial notice of all public Acts passed or hereafter to be passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom and all local and personal Acts directed by Parliament of the United Kingdom to be judicially noticed. We recommend that this provision should be confined to Acts of Parliament of the U.K. passed before the 15th August, 1947, for obvious reasons1.

1. Compare section 37 and discussion relating to it.

21.44. Section 57(3)-Change recommended.-

Section 57(3) requires the court to take judicial notice of the articles of War for the "Indian" Army, Navy and Air Force. A point has been raised whether the word "Indian" should be omitted. It does not, however, appear to be necessary to make any such change. It may be noted that the word "Indian" was substituted for "Her Majesty's" by the Adaptation of Laws Order, 1950.

21.45. Section 57(4).-

Section 57(4) reads:-

"(4) The course of proceeding1 of Parliament of the United Kingdom, of the Constituent Assembly of India, of Parliament and of the legislatures established under any laws for the time being in force in a Province or in the State."

This sub-section should also be confined to the pre-independence period in so far as it relates to authorities which have ceased to function.

1. See Englishman Ltd. v. Lajpatrai, 1910 ILR 37 Cal 760 (775, 787).

21.46. Section 57(5)-Recommendation to delete the sub-section.-

Section 57(5) requires the court to take judicial notice of the Accession and Sign Manual of the sovereign for the time being of the United Kingdom. This sub-section should also be confined to the pre-independence period.

21.47. Section 57(6).-

Section 57(6) is as follows:-

"57(6). All seals of which English courts take judicial notice; the seals of all the Courts in India, and of all courts out of India, established by the authority of the Central Government or the Crown representative; the seals of Courts of Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction and of Notaries Public, and all seals which any person is authorised to use by the Constitution or an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom or an Act or Regulation having the force of law in India."

21.48. Section 57(6)-Change recommended.-

So much of section 57(6) as requires the courts to take judicial notice of all seals of which the English' Courts take judicial notice, and all seals which any person is authorized to use by an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom, should be confined to the pre-independencE period. Mention of seals of courts established by the Crown Representative should also be so confined.

21.49. Revised sub-section.-

As a result of the above discussion, in so far as it relates to section 57(2), (4), (5) and (6) the following re-drafts of these sub-sections are recommended:-

Revised section 57(2)

57(2). All public Acts passed by parliament of the United Kingdom before the 15th day of August, 1947, and all local and personal Acts directed by Parliament of the United Kingdom to be judicially noticed, before that date.

Revised section 57(4).

57(4) The course of proceeding of Parliament of the United Kingdom before the 15th day of August, 1947, of the Constituent Assembly of India, of Parliament and of the legislatures established under any laws for the time being in force in a Province before the said date or a State.

Revised section 57(5)

57(5). The accession and the sign manual of the sovereign for the time being of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in relation to any art done before the 15th day of August, 1947.

Revised section 57(6)

57(6). The following seals that is to say-

(a) all seals of which English courts take judicial notice in relation to any act done before the 15th day of August, 1947;

(b) the seals of all the Courts in India;

(c) seals of all Courts out of India, established by the authority of the Central Government;

(d) seals of all courts established by the authority of the Crown representative in relation to any act done before the 15th day of August, 1947;

(e) seals of courts of Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction and of Notaries Public;

(f) all seals which any person is authorised to use by an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom, in relation to any act done before the 15th day of August, 1947.

VI. Section 57(7)

21.50. Section 57(7)-Change recommended.- Under section 57(7), the Court is bound to take judicial notice of:-

"(7) the accession to office, names, titles, functions and signatures of the persons filling for the time being any public office in any State-if the fact of their appointment to such office is notified in any Official Gazette."

We have not been able to understand why this did not specifically mention officers holding office in India.

21.51. We recommend that the sub-section should be revised as follows:-

"57(7). The accession to office, names, titles, functions, and signatures of the persons filling for the time being any public office in India or any State, if the fact of their appointment to such office is notified in any official Gazette."

Sections 57(8) to 57(13)

21.52. We have so far considered important matters of which judicial notice is taken. Section 57, sub-sections (8) to (13), deal with various other matters of which judicial notice must be taken. Since these sub-sections do not raise any controversies, it is unnecessary to discuss them.

Section 57-second Paragraph

21.53. The second paragraph of section 57 empowers the court to refer to appropriate sources of reference for the purpose of taking judicial notice, and also on all matters of public history, literature, science or art. It needs no comments.

Section 57-third Paragraph

21.54. The third paragraph of section 57 makes it clear that a court may refuse to take judicial notice in the absence of sufficient material. This paragraph is in accordance with the English case of Von Omeron v. Dowick, (1809) 2 Camp 44, in which Lord Ellen borough declined to take judicial notice of the King's proclamation the counsel not being prepared with a copy of the Gazette in which it had been published. In Reg. v. Withers, 1793 Cited in R. v. Holt, (1793) 5 Term Rep 436 (442), it became a material question to consider how far the prisoner owed obedience to his sergeant, and this depended on the Articles of War, which were not produced at the trial. The Judges were of the opinion that the articles ought to have been produced. On that ground, the Court refused to take judicial notice.

21.55. These English cases raise interesting questions as to statutory instruments. We have had occasion to consider the position regarding statutory instruments when discussing1 section 57(1). No further comments are needed on the subject.

1. See discussions as to section 57(1), supra.