Suicide note by deceased valid as ‘will’: Haryana revenue court
If In Own Writing, Admissible Even Without Attestation
Ajay.Sura@timesgroup.com
Chandigarh:08.11.2019
A revenue court of Haryana has held that ‘will’ of a person expressed in suicide note is admissible as valid even if it was not testified by two witnesses as required by law.
“If the suicide note is scribed by the deceased in his own writing, it will be a valid ‘will’ even when it is without the signature of the testator or attestation by two witnesses,” observed the revenue court of Ashok Khemka, financial commissioner, Haryana.
“Technical considerations cannot nullify the substance of the will, especially where it is virtually impossible to seek compliance with the rigors of law,” observed Khemka.
The court was of the view that in such dire circumstances, compelling a technical adherence of procedure would violate the maxim ‘Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia’ (law does not compel one to do the impossible).
“A suicide is an act in desperation and during the period immediately before committing suicide, the situation is extremely emergent, where the testator thinks and believes his death to be imminent. He does not have the inclination or the time to think or act in leisure. He is a man seized, who wishes to make a last and final declaration of his intention with respect to his property, which he desires to be carried into effect after his imminent death,” said the court.
Khemka made these observations while hearing a revision petition against the order dated December 19, 2018, of the commissioner, Ambala division, and the order dated March 22, 2017, of the assistant collector (first grade), Bilaspur (Yamunanagar). The petition, filed by Rupinder Singh, 20, a resident of Kot Basawa village in Yamunanagar district, was regarding mutation of land owned by deceased Inderjeet Singh, his elder brother.
The petitioner’s brother committed suicide on November 3, 2015, and left behind a suicide note in which his property was willed in Rupinder’s favour. An FIR for abetment to suicide was registered against Inderjeet’s widow on Rupinder’s complaint. The suicide note was sent for forensic examination and a final report is awaited.
Meanwhile, revenue officials transferred the deceased’s property to his widow and two minor daughters, they being his legal heirs.
An objection was made by the petitioner on the basis of the suicide note, arguing that in the note, the deceased had willed that he did not want to give any property to his wife and that after his death the petitioner would be the owner in possession of all the properties left by the deceased. The petitioner claimed the suicide note was his brother’s ‘will,’ which he wrote before his death.
The commissioner, Ambala division, however, upheld the decision of the revenue officials entering the mutation of land in favour of the deceased’s wife. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner approached the revenue court, challenging the commissioner’s order.
Deciding the matter pending the forensic report, the revenue court set aside the orders passed by the revenue officials as well as the commissioner, Ambala division, and ordered that the entire property be entered in the names of both the minor daughters of the deceased in equal share.
Regarding the right of the petitioner in the property, the court said it would await the forensic report, which would determine whether the suicide note was in the writing of the deceased, and adjourned the matter.
The court was of the view that in such dire circumstances, compelling a technical adherence of procedure would violate the maxim ‘Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia’ (law does not compel one to do the impossible)
If In Own Writing, Admissible Even Without Attestation
Ajay.Sura@timesgroup.com
Chandigarh:08.11.2019
A revenue court of Haryana has held that ‘will’ of a person expressed in suicide note is admissible as valid even if it was not testified by two witnesses as required by law.
“If the suicide note is scribed by the deceased in his own writing, it will be a valid ‘will’ even when it is without the signature of the testator or attestation by two witnesses,” observed the revenue court of Ashok Khemka, financial commissioner, Haryana.
“Technical considerations cannot nullify the substance of the will, especially where it is virtually impossible to seek compliance with the rigors of law,” observed Khemka.
The court was of the view that in such dire circumstances, compelling a technical adherence of procedure would violate the maxim ‘Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia’ (law does not compel one to do the impossible).
“A suicide is an act in desperation and during the period immediately before committing suicide, the situation is extremely emergent, where the testator thinks and believes his death to be imminent. He does not have the inclination or the time to think or act in leisure. He is a man seized, who wishes to make a last and final declaration of his intention with respect to his property, which he desires to be carried into effect after his imminent death,” said the court.
Khemka made these observations while hearing a revision petition against the order dated December 19, 2018, of the commissioner, Ambala division, and the order dated March 22, 2017, of the assistant collector (first grade), Bilaspur (Yamunanagar). The petition, filed by Rupinder Singh, 20, a resident of Kot Basawa village in Yamunanagar district, was regarding mutation of land owned by deceased Inderjeet Singh, his elder brother.
The petitioner’s brother committed suicide on November 3, 2015, and left behind a suicide note in which his property was willed in Rupinder’s favour. An FIR for abetment to suicide was registered against Inderjeet’s widow on Rupinder’s complaint. The suicide note was sent for forensic examination and a final report is awaited.
Meanwhile, revenue officials transferred the deceased’s property to his widow and two minor daughters, they being his legal heirs.
An objection was made by the petitioner on the basis of the suicide note, arguing that in the note, the deceased had willed that he did not want to give any property to his wife and that after his death the petitioner would be the owner in possession of all the properties left by the deceased. The petitioner claimed the suicide note was his brother’s ‘will,’ which he wrote before his death.
The commissioner, Ambala division, however, upheld the decision of the revenue officials entering the mutation of land in favour of the deceased’s wife. Aggrieved by this, the petitioner approached the revenue court, challenging the commissioner’s order.
Deciding the matter pending the forensic report, the revenue court set aside the orders passed by the revenue officials as well as the commissioner, Ambala division, and ordered that the entire property be entered in the names of both the minor daughters of the deceased in equal share.
Regarding the right of the petitioner in the property, the court said it would await the forensic report, which would determine whether the suicide note was in the writing of the deceased, and adjourned the matter.
The court was of the view that in such dire circumstances, compelling a technical adherence of procedure would violate the maxim ‘Lex Non Cogit Ad Impossibilia’ (law does not compel one to do the impossible)
