CHAPTER XXXI LAW REPORTING IN I DIA Though no such rule was enacted yet through judicial decisic dent was woven into the fabric of the se palechedi ions the doctrine of prece- Indian Legal System (ar the principle on which stress is laid. applies to the facts of the pur (on account of “Judicial dignity” or otherwise. 10 issue of fact” Mata Prasad v. Nageshwar Sahai, 52 A, 398, 417. The theory of precedent brings in its wake the system of law reporting as its necessary concomitant, SYNOPSIS 1. Theory of Precedent. + Importance of + 653 5. Sir, JF Shephens: Indian Law Reports 653 Act, 1875. ‘ : 659 * Dorin...... 653 © Indian Law Roporis Act. 1875: Pro. + Law Commission. 654 visions... : 659 = Publication of Reporis 655 # Its Application 2. Law Reports: Supreme Courts 655 6. Official High Court Reports Early Efforts wun 655 7, Non-Official Report. + Efforts by Barristers and Judges... 656 8. Reports of the Privy Council 3. Law Reports: Sardar Diwani Adalats ... 657 9. Reports of the Federal Court 4. Early High Court Reports ws 658 10. Reports of the Supreme Court of India. 664 UL. Defects of the Present System 664 1. THEORY OF PRECEDENT * Importance of.—The theory of binding force of precedent is firmly established in Eng- _ land. According to this theory, a decision of a court on a point of law is an authority to be fol- _ lowed by all inferior courts. Whatever his own opinion may be, a judge is bound to follow the decision of a court recognized as competent to bind him, and it becomes his duty to administer the law as declared by such a court.’ The justification of the theory is that it is conducive to legal certainty and that it also provides a basis for orderly development of legal rules. The system of precedent has been a powerful factor in the development of the common law in ee Tae England. In spite of some codification of law, it would be still correct to say that the English law is precedent-oriented. But now some reservations are being made as regards the efficac Of the doctrine in so far as it is argued that law is not static, it is developing continually and, therefore, too rigid an adherence to stare decisis may detract from a scientific development of law. Therefore, itis argued that courts must use precedents creatively and not mechanically.” However, in spite of the reservations, the doctrine of precedent still remains a reality and a lower court remains bound to follow the decisions of a higher court. .* Dorin.—The theory of precedents has come to prevail in India as well since the advent of > the British system of ieatice, The Englishmen who presided as judges, and who practised as _ lawyers in the courts in India, whether of the Crown or of the Company, soon started follow- ‘ing ‘the English tradition and began to rely on precedents. The Company's courts under the ‘ammittce on Law Reporting. para (1940), came Ge Alea PRAM Law and the Mstor And «seme Scanned with CamScanner654 CHAP, XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA pae Justice, equity and good conscience,’ and the Crown courts being bound to admin. a used to draw freely on the English law and therefore on the decisions of the English ita aa Carly as 1813, Dorin, who later became a Judge of the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Cal cua, Advocated the idea of giving statutory recognition to the doctrine of precedent in India im | think it should be enacted by a Regul Court shall be considered as cede ion that from a given period, the judgments of the nding upon itself and upon the inferior courts in Similar cases which may arise thereafter. This will have the effect of making the superige ‘SUNS more cautious and of introducing something like a system for the other courts, the ant of which ts now very much felt. Hitherto it has not been the Custom to refer to prece, dents and for aught the judges of the court may know, the same points may have been de- {ided over again and pethaps not always the same way. It is obvious, that having something like a system established would tend to abridge the labour of civil courts ‘Though no such rule was ever enacted yet through judicial decisions the doctrine of prece. dent was woven into the fabric of the Indian legal system. Thus, in ara Pd. v Nagetiner Sahai,” the Privy Council declared that “itis not open to the courts in India to question any principle enunciated by this Board, although they have a right of examining the facts of any £a8¢ before them to see whether and how far the principle on which stress is laid applies to the facts of the particular case, Nor is it open to them, whether on account of “judicial dignity or gtherwise, to question its decision on any particular issue of fact.” In a nuinber of cases, the High Courts declared the doctrine of precedent and laid down that subordinate courts were bounded by the decisions of the High Courts even if the lower courts did not agree with the Correctness of a particular decision. In P. Ramaswami v. Chandra Kottaya,’ the High Court observed: “A court subordinate to the High Court is bound to follow the ruling of the High Court and is not entitled to rely upon the decisions of the other High Courts and to decline to follow the decision of this court”. ¢ Law Commission.—As the Law Commission of India observed in 1958:” The decisions of the High Cours have not been invested with the authority of law by any enactment But itis well settled that the courts subordinate to 2 High Court are bound by its decisions and it is not open to them to refuse to follow the law as interpreted by that fligh Court. The High Courts have made this clear in a number of decisions and have gone so fat as to characterise refusal on the part of subordinate courts to follow their decisions as being tantamount to insubordination. “A single High Court Judge is bound by the decisions of a Division Bench which is bound by the decisions of the Full Bench of the same High Court. The decisions of one High Court have persuasive value in other High courts in India To a limited extent, statutory recognition was given to the theory of precedent then Section 212 of the Government of India Act, 1935, laid down that the law declared by the Federal Court and by any judgment of the Privy Council must, so far as applicable, be binding on. and must be followed by, all the courts in British India. Ar. 141 of the present Constitution lays down that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be recognized as binding on all courts within India.'" As regards the decisions of the High Courts, however. the theory of precedent is still based on judicial declarations as noted above." It is thus clear that the binding force of Supra. Ch XX Supra. XX Selections from the Records ofthe East India Howse, 11,20. AKO see. MORLEY, Administration of ate # Brinch Indus : 521A. 398,417 ‘AIR 1925 Kau 261 ‘so see, Dn w Stari, AIR 1936 Bom $9: Vinayak» Moreshwar’ AUR 1984 Neg. 44,46, 40:5 Baira, AiR 1983 All 74. Ree» Ram Dasa, AIR1980 Al. 134 9. Law Commision, XIV Repel, 26" Also sce 1G. SAXENA, Tocery of Kay Ditawan. Supreme Court of Ils 98. 40,56 0. Jar Kane Sher Singh AIR 1960 SCHR Se for commence on this Anite MP. JAIN, dian Comtiational Law. 191 (1987) ty Tiger © Ram Davil, AIR 1950 Ail 134, SETH. J. expressed the view. that ernsion to follow 12 Feerston amounts 10, “deicliction of duty” and ‘an act of insubordination” on the part of a sehen dec panty Mishra . Regutran. Orisa High Cour 197801 SCC MT tikey La Precedents, 3 Jeypur, LL 188 (1960 High Coot frit Ab Scanned with CamScannerLAW REPORTS SUPREME COURTS 655 precedents is firmly established in the Indian Legal System. Th superior courts are as much the Law of the land as lepisloivg Sache eel conclusion that it should continue to operate and it I. igi among es adanages ec ae a cued thf administration of law it tends to promote convenience and avoids delays. If earlier decisions were not recognised as binding every court would have te decide the same question over and burden of the jedeea ca ,thich would cause protonged argument and delay and increase the ranired orig ee ges do the breaking point. Certainty in law. a very necessary attribute ean he aeete tan tay, the Courts decide the same points of law in the same manney. Theve would pe confusion anc — if the system of binding precedents is not followed. A statute may then Peaeerected differently in the districts of one and the same State. A central statute may be ot af na tf One State and unconstitutional in another. This is bound to be the inevi- table result of permitting each court to interpret the law according 10 its own lights without reference to precedents," The Commission thus observed: ‘ “It decisions of superior courts or even of the same court are not to be regarded as bindis ‘on the Judges it will be impossible for individuals to regulate their future conduct relying o any particular view of the law. The men will cease to be certain and men will not know where they stand as regards their legal rights and obligation.” The Law Commission pointed out that the First Law Commission or 1834 resorted to the technique of adding illustrations to the Sections in the codes in the hope that these would serve the purpose of decided cases and thus need for citing any precedents would be avoided." But this hope of the First Law Commission has been belied. For over a hundred years, the Indian Courts have been using precedents and treating them as authoritative * Publication of Reports.—The theory of precedent brings in its wake the system of law Feporting as its necessary concomitant. Publication of decisions is a condition precedent for the theory to operate: there must exist reliable reports of cases; or, if the cases are to be bind- ing there must be precise records of what they do lay down and it is only then that the doctrine of stare decisis can function meaningfully. Even when a decision is not binding, the reasoning. contained therein may be of value to the lawyer and judge in ascertaining the law applicable to the case in hand. Law reports form one of the primary sources of law in a common law sys- tem. Law reports play a very significant role in a precedent-ridden legal system as they make easily available to the profession the cases decided by the various courts, It will be practically impossible for a lawyer or a judge himself to personally explore the records of the courts in order to dig out an appropriate precedent applicable to the case in hand. Accordingly, an at- tempt is made here to survey the efforts made in India to create a system of law reports in course of time. 2, LAW REPORTS SUPREME COURTS: « Early Efforts —Law reporting started in India with the creation of the Supreme Court of Calcutta in 1774."* In the beginning, there was no organised system of law reporting. Early reporting was a private enterprise; only sporadic individual attempts at reporting were made by the practicing lawyers or judges and the underlying purpose was “to prevent much contra- nety of judgment and to produce uniformity of decision” on matters on which a conflict of decisions would be disastrous.” To start with, reports of cases of the Supreme Court at Cal- cutta were inserted by way of illustration in certain legal publications, Sir Francis Mac- naghten, formerly a Judge of the Court, included certain cases in his Considerations upon 13. XIV Rep. 628-629. 44. Law Comm, XIV Rep., 628. 1S. Chapter XXV. ‘ Chanter VI, : TEAR bn eepeion British India, 62, cbseses: “The luge of th od Supreme Coun mae o sei ‘effon to we good re Almost from the earliest insttution of the Supr of ioe se aeg irae mn ec a mak ph rg some of them of an inferior quality, and there were periods for which no reports af all existed and during whic many valuable decisions passed altogether unreported” Scanned with CamScanner656 CHAP. XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA Hindu Law, published in 1824." These reports from the nature of the work were confined to Cases involving questions of Hindu Law. Sir William Macnaghten took similar pains 1n his Principles and Precedents of Moohammedan Law published in 1825."" Notes of cases were Contained in Longueville Clarke's edition of the Rules and Orders of the Supreme Court pub- lished in 1829. These notes of cases are very valuable and they relate to points of law of great interest. Notes of cases were inserted in Smoult’s ‘Collection of Orders’ from 1774 to 1823 Published in 1834. These notes are succinct but highly useful and comprise decisions princi- Pally on points of practice from the year 1774 to 1798 * Efforts by Barristers and Judges.—Some effort was then made at law reporting by the Barristers and Judges associated with these Courts and a number of reports of the cases de- cided by these Courts have come down to us. To name the reports pertaining to the Calcutta Supreme Court, Morton's Reports are the earliest: these were published in 1841 and they cover a long period from 1774 to 1841. This collection was principally compiled from the Manuscript notes of Chief Justice, Sir R. Chambers. Justice Hyde and other Judges of the Court. The cases relate almost exclusively, to questions peculiar to India, Morley has charac- terised Morton's Reports as a work of the greatest utility and authority.""? Besides. there are other collections as well, such as, Bignell’s Reports, 1830-31, of which only one volume ap- eared and in which “the cases are fully and ably reported”; Fulton’s Reports, of which only one volume appeared iy) 1845 containing cases decided by the Court between 1842-44: Mon- triou's Reports, 1846;"' Montriou's Select Cases from the Morton's Reports, the collection being known as the Morton's Reports by Montriou; Boulnois’ Reports, 1853-59. in two vol: ‘umes: Gasper’s Commercial Cases, 1851-1860: George Taylor's Reports of Cases decided from January, 1847 to December, 1848: Taylor and Bell's Reports, 847-53. in three volumes Casper’s Reports of Small Cause Court Cases determined by the Calcutta Supreme Court during 1850-59. A. useful collection of the Calcutta Supreme Court Cases was prepared by Chief Justice Sir Edward Hyde East. This collection in manuscript form was placed at the disposal of Morley who published it in exfenso in 1850 in the second volume of his Digest of Cases. These cases. according to Morley. contained “many most impgrtant decisions on points of native law, and questions relating to the jurisdiction of the Court. For the Supreme Caurt at Bombay, Sir Erskine Perry, once its Chief Justice, made two col- lections: one of them was to illustrate the Oriental life and the application of English law to India decided by the Bombay Supreme Court; this collection is known as Perry's Oriemal Cases. His other collection was in the manuscript form which was full and verbarim published in the second volume of Morley’s Digest. The manuscript was carefully revised and corrected, by the Chief Justice himself before printing. For the Supreme Court at Madras. the only col- lection of cases to be found is that published by Chief Justice Sir Thomas Strange in 1816 in three volumes covering the period 1798 to 1816. About Strange’s Reports, Morely remarks: “The cases are clearly set forth, and the judgments frequently given en tire: but from the pau- city of the materials placed at the disposition of the leaned judges at that period, the decisions of the Court, where they relate to questions of native law. must be taken with some reserva- tion, Most of the above-mentioned old reports became too uifticult wo procure as they went out of print in course of time and became rare. They were not available even in the libraries of great lawyers and so the cases in these reports were not generally known. They became literally sealed books for long. Therefore, reference to the old cases and their citation in courts became very difficult. The value of these old decisions was great both for the professional lawyer as well as the academic researcher because the cases not only contained good law, but they were also of great historical interest as they depicted how: in the early days, the English lawyers and judges laid the foundation of a system of Anglo-Indian jurisprudence in India. Constant refer- ence was made to these early cases by the Privy Council, several High courts in India and by Various standard legal text books. An attempt was therefore made to reprint the cases in the old reports and re-issue a new series known as the Indian Decisions Old Series). This series —_— ct XXVIIL. 19 Ghaper xxv 1 et ce / 20. Money Dae era lw pact nthe Supreme Cun 22, MoRLEY's Digest cciv-. Scanned with CamScannerLAW REPORTS SADAR DIWANI ADALATS 657 aed EE ae Row started its Publication from 1911. ‘The first volume covering Edlcutta reported in the foie nS & verbatim reprint of the cases ofthe Summers eens Calcutta reported in the following earlier RPorts Montrion’s Edition of Morton's Reports, Montrion’s Hindu Law cases, Montrion's Reports, Fultarn Reports, Bignell’s Reports and also such of the cases in the Morton’s Reports as were omitted by Montrion when he revised them. The second volume of the Indian Decisions (Old Series) covers the Period from 1847 to 1859 and reprints such cases of the Calcutta Supreme Court as had been carlier reported in George Taylor Reports, three volumes of Taylor and Dell's Reports. Gasper’s Reports. con- wining sma cause Court eases decided by the Supreme Court of Caleut ee hea eer the Indian Decisions covers cases reported from 1851 lo 1860 in Boulnois’ Reports (two vol- umes, 1853 to 1859), Gasper's Commercial Cases (1851 to 1860) and Sir Edward Hyde East's THIS" fo Gast as Printed in the Morley’s Digest, second volume: forthe period of 1781 ta 1819. In this way. the cases of the Calcutta Supreme Court are found collected in the first these NGlumes of the Indian Decisions (Old Series). Both of the Perry's Collectong of Cocca of the Supreme Court at Bombay have been reprinted in the fourth volume of the lnion Dect Frans Oly Ses een Fendered to the legal profession by the publication of the Indian Deci- sions (Old Series) insofar as these reports resurrected from oblivion the old decisions and made them accessible to those who may be interested in them. 3, LAW REPORTS SADAR DIWANI ADALATS The Sadar Adalats were, Company's courts and were at the apex of the mofussil judicial system. As already stated,” the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta had ‘Suggested publication of its decisions. The Law Commission had also suggested formation of a digest of decisions of the courts, The first printed reports of the vases decided in the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta were started by Sir William Hay Macnaghten, when he was the Registrar of the Adalat. The series has seven volumes covering the period of 1791 to 1849. In 1827, a second edition of the first two volumes of the series was reprinted. The reports contained in the first volume were chiefly prepared by Dorm who was later appointed a Judge of the Adalat. The notes appended to cases in this volume are entitled to great weight as they were written of approved by the Judges who decided the cases: and those explaining the intricate points of Hindu law are espe- cially valuable as coming from the pen of Henry Colebrooke. This volume contains decisions covering the period 1791 to 1811. The second, third and a part of the fourth volumes "were published by Sir Willam Macnaghten. These volumes contain ‘decisions covering the periods 1812-19. 1820-24 and 1825-29 respectively. The later portion of the Fourth Volume contains cases selected and prepared by C. Udney. his successor in the Registrar's office. The cases contained in the Fifth Volume were reported by Sutherland and cover the period 1830-34 Those given in the Sixth and Seventh Volumes have no reporters’ names affixed to them, but they were approved by the court, and were prepared by the Registrar."* These volumes contain cases covering the periods 1835-40 and 1841-48, There was another series of reports known as Select Reports of Summary Cases, which were published as “approved by the court.” These teports were adapted to serve as precedents to the inferior courts. Reports of Summary Cases determined in the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta front 1841-1846 were appended to the Sev- enth Volume of the above mentioned reports. Inthe year 1845, a selection of reports of sum- mary cases was published separately, containing select decisions from the years 1834 to 1841 The series continued till 1843. Thereafter this series was discontinued froma 1 January 1849 under a resolution of the Court dated 27 April 1849. The resolution stated that the “Court are of opinion that their (Reports of Summary Cases) publication may go on, not as approved by ~ the Court but with the sanction only of the judge in charge of the Miscellaneous Department whose decisions they are and who will note such of them as he may think useful for publica- tion.” A reprint of the Reports of Summary Cases decided by the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Cal- cutta comprising cases from 1832 t0 1852 was published in 1853. In 1856, another edition was Published from 1834 to 1855. ‘ x Menai Bigs, Leecevii, Aw see. GP, Muklzerjewt, Reports of Judicial Procedents, AIR 1962.1, 89. Scanned with CamScanner658 CHAP. XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA Reports of cases, chiefly in summary appeals decided in the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Ca culta, were published by Seveste, a pleader ofthe Cour. The Fist Volume of this collection comprises three Parts and it was completed in 1842. A Second Volume was printed in 1846. In 1850, one Bellasis published a volume of the reports of the decisions of the Calcutta Sadar Diwani Adalat from 1840—1848, These were mostly decisions of the full cour. Act Nil of 1843 directed the Sadar Adalats to record their judgments in English. The Act also diregted the decisions of the Sadar Adalats at Calcuita and Agra to be published monthly.” The decisions of the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Calcutta started to be published monthly front 1845 onwards so that these might be useful as precedents both to the public and the profession. These reports were known as the Bengal Sadar Diwani Adalat Reports. They an be said to be the oldest official series of law reports in India. This series of reports was started under the authority of the Governor of Bengal and was published monthly. and a sepa- Tate volume was prepared for each year. This series continued to be published till the abolition Of the Adalat in 1862. All the cases published in these reports have now been reprinted in the serie indian Decisions (Old Series) rom Volume Vi onwards. Reports of the decisions of the Sadar Diwani Adalat of the North Western Provinces, re- corded in English under the above mentioned Act, began to be issued from 1846 onwards. The reports of the cases decided in the Sadar Adalat at Madras were few in number. A volume was ~~ published in 1843, entitled “Decrees in Appeal Suits determined in the Court of Sadar Ada- lat.” It contains select decrees from 1805 to 1826. The cases on Hindu law in this collection are interesting as they throw light on the prevailing doctrines of the Southem School. Deci- sions in English ofthe Adalat, rendered in pursuance of Act XII of 1843, began to be issued ym July, 1849, For decisions of the Sadar Diwani Adalat at Bombay. there are two collections available. The first is the well-known series of reports by Borradaile, a Judge of the Adalat, published in two volumes in 1825. It mostly contains cases on points of law peculiar to the Bombay region. The second is a small anonymous publication which appeared in 1843. The reports of the cases in this volume are prepared by the Deputy Registrar of the Adalat, The cases are ar- ranged chronologically and are scattered over a period of 1820 to 1840. In the branch of.criminal judicature, the reports are comparatively fewer as compared with those of the civil judicature. Only two series of reports appear to have been printed for crimi- nal cases. One comprises five volumes and contains sentences of the Nizamat Adalat at Cal- cutta. The first two volumes were prepared by Sir William Macnaghten; the three last volumes have no reporter's name. The second series contains reports ‘of criminal cases determined in the Sadar Fozdari Adalat of Bombay from 1827 to 1846. The compilation is by Bellasis, Dep- uty Registrar of the Court; and the cases have been selected to illustrate the application of the taw both on questions of evidence and of punishment, and also to settle doubtful points of procedure and practice. The first volume was published in the year 1849. From 1851, a monthly series of the decisions of the Nizamat Adalat at Calcutta began to appear. At about the same time, monthly reports of the Madras Sadar Fozdari Adalat began to appear. The re- ports of the Sadar Fozdari Adalat of Bombay from 1827-1846 were published in 1848 4, EARLY HIGH COURT REPORTS ‘The establishment of the High Courts, in 1862 is a conspicuous landmark, an event of unique importance and the precursor of the modem era of aw and justice.” The figs Com brought in their wake official reports. The Madras High Court brought along with it the Ma: 35, When in 1813, tb Compary invited suggestions improv he Indian Legal Sytem. supa, ropos made wa publ the desios fe Sad Divan Adda SDA) Tie dcolos a Aar oo oy ret It was therefore suggested that tt vernment should promulgate a regul | making scisions of ihe Sadar Divan Adalat binging precedent one awe omer aaiste ee cen Sere Oa pce ee Sa Ata inte es Eons tebe a any net a fom eft s ishing ts decisions. Nothing carte out of the propowal all the oe ‘16. Chapter XIX. Le the time. Scanned with CamScannerSIR J.P. STEPHENS: THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS ACT, 1875 659 |__ dras High Court Reports in eight volumes covering a period from 1862 to 1875, They consti- tute a fairly well edited series; the. facts are given in full and so also the judgmenss of the lower courts whenever necessary. Occasionally, though not always, argumenls of the counsels are also given. These reports contain some of the best written judgments of the Madras High Court, Similar reports came into existence for the High Courts of Bombay and Calcutta. There are 12 volumes of the Bombay High Court Reports for the period 1862-1875, and 15 volumes of Bengal Law Reports for 1868 to 1876 for the Calcutta High Court. The various High Court Reports were published by the Government through the help of official reporters. Along with these official reports, but competing with them, there came into existence some Private publications also, such as, the Weekly Reporter, Indian Jurist at Calcutta, Hay’s Re ports, Marshall's Reports, Coryton’s Reports, Bourke's Reports, all of the Calcutta High Court, covering the period 1862 to 1868; Madras Jurist at Madras, 2 volumes of Hyde E. Re- Ports of the Calcutta High Court for 1862-63; 3 volumes of Kinealy and Henderson Reports of the Calcutta High Court from 1881-1883. ‘The Sutherland's Weekly Reporter covers the pe- tiod from 1864 to 1876. Hay and Marshall are much prized Reports. They contain some valu- able judgments of Sir Bames Peatock. Then, there are Borradaile’s Reports of the decisions of the Bombay High Court, Borradaile was a Judge of the Sadar Adalat at Bombay which was merged with the High Court, 5. SIR J.P, STEPHENS: THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS ACT, 1875 Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, the Law Member of the Government of India. in his minute in 1872 on. the administration of justice in British India, severely criticised the system of law reporting prevailing in the country at the time and brought to light its manifold drawbacks. ‘These reports, he said, “are of very different degrees of merit some are very good. others very bad indeed, consisting merely of reprints of the written judgments of the judges with no state~ ment of the facts of the case or of the arguments of the advocates. These reports, however, are now increasing in number so rapidly that a complete set of them at the present moment would consist of upwards of 60 thick volumes, which are growing”, and a complete set of cases on Indian Law would cost about Rs. 250 a year to keep up. He regarded this as a “most mischie~ vous state of things” and one which “ought not to be permitted to continue.” Many distin- guished High Court Judges had expressed themselves strongly as to “the mischief which is done by the enormous multiplication of reports, the indiscriminating manner in which they are accepted as of authority coordinate with the Acts of the legislature, and the very poor quality of many of the reports.. xr pointed out that the private commercial enterprises publishing the reports : i tocomue any distinction between cases worth-reporting and those not worth-reporting, ‘and so the private reports contained many cases falling in the latter category which was “in the highest degree mischievous as tending (0 overload the law with needless precedents, and so to ceafuse arid hamper the whole administration of justice.” in many cases really no new point Gas decided but merely a question of fact between two or mote parties. In other instances, als of law were decided or remarked upon incidentally or hastily and in such a manner as oi o-express the careful and deliberate opinions of the court. in almost every case. the length ROL LO ex DIAS as out of all proportion t0 its importance which unnecessarily increased the ei a fe'report, and which cost unnecessary money and labour to the public. it was his that law reporting should be regarded as a branch of legislation and that it was hardly a ‘important duty of the Government to publish that part ofthe law which is enunciated by ibunals in their judgments than to promulgate its legislation. tian Law Reports Act, 1875: Provisions. —Although the various High Court Reports PO through the official agency still there was no statute dealing with the p a ear ie also felt to be expedient to diminish the multitude and ex- Taw reporting. | tM in British India and to improve their quality. With this in Dy repo De A iw passed in 1875 on the initiative of Law Member FE ea oped the publication “Of the reports of the cases decided by the High “Ga caries pra, 502. the Government wa at this time considering preparation af «digest of Scanned with CamScanner660 CHAP. XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA Courts, and also sought to control the indiscriminate citation of cases in the courts. S. 3 of the Act runs as follows: “No Court shall be bound to hear cited, or shall receive or treat as authority binding on it, the report of any case decided by any of the said High Courts on or after the said day other than a report published under the authority of the Governor General-in-Council. “This Act can be said to be a significant step towards the implementation of the theory of precedent in relation to the decisions of the High Courts. Although the Act nowhere said ‘that the decisions of a High Court were binding on the inferior courts, within its jurisdiction yet, putting positively, the necessary result of S. 3 would be that a court would be bound to treat as nding the report of a case decided by the High Court, On the other hand, the Act is the first legislative measure seeking to restrict the citation of in official reports. The purpose of S.3 Was to diminish the quantity of law reporting and improve its quality by regulating the indis- (ziminate citation of eases in the courts. The Act, in effect provides thal courts are not bound ta hear cited any unauthorized series of law reports. The Act by seeking to restrict the citation of unofficial reports, seeks to constitute a partial monopoly, if the judges so desi, in favour of the official law reports. But, in effect, as a measure to control and regulate the publication of private law reports, the Act has proved to be a dead letter in practice. S. 4 of the Act provides that nothing in the Act “shall be construed to give any judicial deci- sion any further or other authority than it would have had if this Act had not been’ passed.” The enactment of the Act was strongly opposed. Sir George Campbell, the then Lt. Gover- nor of Bengal, expressed his opposition in these words: f you put into the hands of any one authority the power of deciding which of these deci sions should be treated as authoritative, and which are to be rejected and sniffed out, you give that authority an enormous power over the ‘Superior courts of the country; you make him, in fact, Judge over the Judges.” S.3 of the Act gave authenticity to the official reports, but the important question that arises is whether the courts are at liberty to refuse to follow decisions which would otherwise be binding on them on the mere ground that they have not been reported in the Indian Law Re. Ports series but have been reported only in an unofficial journal? S, 3 is very clumsily drafted. It says that no court shall receive or treat as “an authority” binding on it the “report of any case.” This is obviously otiose, the reason being that itis the decision and mot its report which has authority. So. it means nothing to say that no Court is bound to receive a report as. an authority. The better view has come to be that S. 3 leaves it to the option of the Courts to hear cited any unofficial report of decisions of High Courts. S. 3 does not take away the authority of unpublished precedents, or give a published decision a higherauthority than that possessed! be it as a precedent. A High Court decision is authoritative by itself and not because it is te. ted. The fact that a High Court decision is reported does not add to its authority in any way, ttonly makes it authentic. Many cases remain unreported in official publications. though some of them are quite important as deciding significant points of law and practice, and the fact that they are not reported many authorised publication does not detract from their authority in any way. They can be cited in the courts which would give due attention to them, Suppose a Dive sion Bench ruling of a high Court is reported in an unofficial report hut notin the official sec Ties, Ifa similar question is raised before a single Judge of the same High Court subsequently, can the Judge ignore the Division Bench ruling on the ground that itis reported i an unolf ial, notin an official seport? As Chief Justice Maclean has said, the Act "does not prevent the ratreatom looking at an unreported judgment of other judges of the same Court. This always has been done and ought to be done. A judgment is nonetheless an authority because i hes een reported. Otherwise, the question of whether such a judgment could or could not be oo regarded would depend upon the mere whim of the reportei."* CaeaePendence, the words “Sate Govemment™ have been substitute instead ofthe “Governor-General 29. Mahomed Alls Mir Nazar AliS CWN 326, 329(1901).Nivo«i. J sid in Vinayut v. Moreviwar Ni 3. do "From te pin a iw ofthe jdgnertDcening sical eee ks cena” AIR 1984 Nag Ihe case isthe decision and nut the opinion of the cour no the report ofa tha uke a Precedent, Hence an the decion witch eg ied 3 20 authority if the acu decitn ean be shown ffom the orca ie the decision which establishes the precedent and te repo but serves as evulonee wee Scanned with CamScannerOFFICIAL HIGH CourT REPORTS 661 The position of the courts in this connection has been that under S. 3, port other than the one published under the authority of Government is. that such a court is not bound to hear such a binding upon it. There is nothing in S. 3 to Court is not to be treated as binding upon a High Court and not merely a report. The only serves merely as evidence of it. The it is only when a re- cited before a court Teport cited or to receive or treat it as an authority show that a certified copy of a decision of a High lower court. What is binding is the decision of the decision establishes the precedent, and the report rule of exclusive citation of the Indian Law Reports could not therefore be followed by the courts as any decision could be cited as precedent even if not reported in the authorised report. S. 3 is thus purely a rule of evidence and it does not affect the law as to precedents. This act has created a lot of confusion. The Allahabad High Court has ruled that all that the Indian Law Reports Act ensures is that the Judges who have Ro access to the decisions themselves shall be provided with their accurate copies. Mere re- Porting of a ruling does not give an greater sanctity than it had before a court. A certified copy Establishes its authenticity and correctness. On such a copy being produced, the lower courts are bound to treat the certified copy in the same way as reported judgments. Section 3 pro- vides merely that the court should not look into unauthorised reports. What is binding is the decision of the High Court, and not a report.”® As the Bombay High Court has said, even “an unreported case may be cited as an authority if the actual decision can he shown from the original sources. ..It is the decision which establishes the precedent and the report but serves as evidence of it.” * Its Application —The Act applies only to the decisions of the High Courts and not to the decisions of the Privy Council, the Federal Court or the Supreme Court. In the eye of law, there is no difference between official and unofficial reports in respect of the decisions of these Courts. S. 84, second paragraph, Evidence Act, applies to all of them. and thus pre- sumption of genuineness applies to all. Because of these various anomalies, demand has been made from time to time that this Act should be repealed. The Law Commission in its XIV Report characterised the Act as a “dead letter” as, in spite of it, private reports have been cited and relied upon by the highest courts. The Law Commission therefore observed with regard to this Act: «the Indian Law Reports Act wilt have to be repealed... by reason pethaps of the delays in the publication of the Indian Law Reports series the provision of section 3 have not been observed by the courts. Indeed, the judgments of alt courts, including those of the Judicial ‘Committee of the Privy Council and the Supreme Court, have referred to decisions published in private series as authoritative and binding.” Recently, the Law Commission in its 96th report has reiterated the suggestion that the Act be repealed because, if taken literally, it could create certain anomalies. If a single judge, re- lying on Section 3, refuses to look at an ‘unofficial’ ruling of a division bench, then the posi tion would be unsatisfactory. There would be a division bench ruling disregarded by a single judge. Of course, in practice, the single judge will consult the decision of the division bench, as reported in the unofficial series or—though this is rare—the original judgment from the records of the court.” “This itself shows that the Act has to be often disregarded if serious anomalies are to be avoided,” says the Law Commission.” 6. OFFICIAL HIGH COURT REPORTS After the enactment of the Indian Law Reports Act, 1875, it became necessary to have an official series of reports. Accordingly, the official series of Indian Law Reports was started during the tenure of Law Member Hobhouse.”” The Councils of Law Reporting were set up in the several High Courts and reports began to be published under the authority of the Srate Government. The Chief Justice of each High Court nominates a committee with himself or another Judge as Chairman to supervise the publication of these reports. Each High Court now has a series of Indian Law Reports (ILR) for itself. Thus, a case decided by the Madras High Court may be found reported in the ILR Madras; a case of the Bombay High Cour, in ICR 30, Tarok Prasad v. Shanti Lata, (1975) 2 ALR $01. 31. Vinavak Shamrao v. Moreshwar, AIR 1944 Nag. 44, 46. BR XW Repors 1.688 ‘ompare discussion in Vinayak v. Moreshar, AIR 1944 Nag. 44 34. 96th Report 9-10 (1988). 38. Chapter XXill Scanned with CamScanner662 CHap, XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA Bombay, and so on for every High Court. These are the official public monthly the decisions of the respective High Courts. The year of commencement of the ILR series, High Court wise, is as follows: Bombay, Cal. cutta, Madras and Allahabad 1876, immediately after the enactment of the Act; Patna—1922; Lucknow—1926; Nagpur—1936; Punjab—1948; Cuttack and Assam—1949; Rajasthan and Mysore—1951; Andhra Pradesh—1954; Madhya Pradesh—1957 Kerala—1957; Gujarat— 1960; Delhi— 1968. 7-NON -OFFICIAL REPORTS The Law Reports Act could not suppress the publication of a large number of private re- Ports. The incompleteness and costliness of the official reports, and the delay in reporting cases therein, make the private reports thrive. The reporting in official reports is neither Prompt nor efficient. The important rulings are not reported. These deficiencies in the official Series of reports have given rise to the system of private reports, some of which are extremely Popular. The theory of precedent also encourages private, reports because. in theory, even an unreported decision can be cited, for it is the decision of the higher court which is binding on the lower court, and it is not binding because it has been reported in an official report. Thus Private law reports prosper in India. ‘A number of law reports are being published by non-official agencies on a commercial ba- sis; they cover a very wide range and are published from various points of view. The Law Commission in its XIV Report in 1958 gave a list of 52 law reports being published in India at the time as follows: All India Reports, 2; Official Law Reports (ILR’s). 15; Non-official law reports, 28; Special law reports, 7. Since then the total number of various series of reports has gone up further, and new reports are being added quite frequently. Today, there is a prolifera. tion of private reports. Some of the more well-known series of reports are mentioned below. The Madras Law Journal started publication from Madras in 1891 and contains cases of the Madras High Court, the Privy Council, and now the Supreme Court. on appeal from that High Court. It is issued in weekly parts and all parts issued during one year are then bound up ina volume. It was the first journal of its kind in India to combine both reports and journal on the Plan of some English journals like the English Law Journal, Law Times, etc. On the same lines is the Allahabad Law Journal. It started publication from Allahabad in 1904 to better serve the needs of the law years and judges in N.W. Provinces. It reported cases decided by the Allahabad High Court and appeals from there previously to the Privy Council and then, to the Supreme Court. It was issued in weekly parts which were then bound in volume for one year and the total number of volumes reached 71. This journal ceased publica. tion in 1974. It has now resumed publication under the management of the All India Reporter. From Calcuta, the Calcutta Weekly Notes started publication in 1896: itis issued in weekly pars on the same lines as the Allahabad and Madras Law Journals. It is devoted to reporting cases of the Calcutta High Court. All weekly parts are bound in a volume for one year A a fies known as Indian Cases started publication from Lahore in 1909 to serve the needs of the whole of India. It reported cases trom ali High Courts. Partition of the country afferted ite Publication and it ceased publication in 1946 after 225 volumes. From Bombay. the Bombay Law Reporter started publication in 1899. : ‘The most popular present day private publication, however, is the All India R. Published from Nagpur. It started publication in 1922 but brought out back selene Ae {914 onwards and continues up-to-date. It is issued in monthly paris Iti an one publi- cation as it seeks to cover all the High Courts, Judicial Commissioners" Courts nea tee brome Court Earlier, it used to report the decisions of the Privy Council and the Fakes eng fe broken up into separate parts for the supreme Court and the various High Cours and tound accordingly. It corinne ne or ‘both of a reporter as well as of a journal. Besides the above, there is a host of other unofficial sports in India. These reports are mostly of local interest and are notmeny vogue on an all (aala level ¢.8. Kerala Law Times (1948), Patna Law Times (1920) Nutone aw Journal - (1918), Madras Weekly Notes (1910) etc, ia pur tions reporting Scanned with CamScannerREPORTS OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL 663 There are also a number of reports of a specialised nature devoted to specified areas of law. Thus, Madras Law Journal brings out a separate series of reports MLJ (Criminal) which i published fortnightly. This series started publication in 1957. It reports criminal cases decided by the Supreme Court and the High Courts of Madras, Andhra Pradesh, Kerala and Kasnatake, In 1904, the Criminal Law Joumal started publication from Lahore. It has now been laken mer. It is published monthly and is now running into its 95th Vol- ia having a bearing on various criminal ts which started publication in 1971 and ‘olume and reports cases on taxation, company law, and i ide Practices Act. It is published monthly. All India Re- Porter also brings out Labour and Industrial cases—a series of reports published monthly from 1968 and now running in its 22nd Volume and containing cases exclusively on labour, indus- trial and service laws. Income Tax Reports report cases on law of income tax, wealth-tax, gift BX and estate duty. These reports were started in 1933, and are published by the Company Law Institute of India, Madras. Besides, there are reports known as Labour Appeal Cases, Company Cases. Sales Tax Cases, etc. Election Law Reports were published under the authority of the Election Commission of India and its First Volume appeared in 195]. These Kports continued till election disputes were decided by the tribunals but ceased publication when this jurisdiction was transferred to the High Courts, and election cases are now reported as any other High Court cases. 8. REPORTS OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL- As has been discussed earlier,” the Privy Council served as the highest court of appeal from India and its decisions were binding on all the courts in India. The reports of the Privy Council cases were thus of a fundamental value to the Indian lawyers and the courts. There have been several collections of cases decided by the Privy Council in early days. One such collection, which includes some cases of the Privy Council on appeal from India, was compiled by Jerom William Knapp in three volumes covering the period from 1829 to 1836. Alll cases contained therein have been reprinted in the English Reports (ER.) in the Twelfth Volume. Another col- lection of the Privy Council cases is by Knapp and Moore. Then E.F. Moore brought out a Collection of the Privy Council cases known as the Moore's P.C. in 15 volumes running from 1836 to 1862, All the cases contained in this collection have been reprinted in the English Reports, Volumes 12 to 15. There are some Indian cases in this collection. From 1862 to 1873, Moore issued another series of reports of the Privy Council cases known as Moore's P.C. (New Series). It contains 9 volume all the cases contained therein have been reproduced in Volumes 15 to 17 of the English Reports. A series exclusively devoted to reporting decisions of the Privy Council on appeal from India came to be compiled by F.F. Moore and came to be known as the Moore's Indian Appeals (MIA.), Moore was a pracuising barrister and was en. couraged to collect and publish the Indian series by the Court of Directors of the East India Company by agreeing to purchase 300 copies of the reports prepared by him. Thus came into existence the famous MIA series. The reports of the cases in the series are very useful. There is a complete history of the case from the beginning to the end. The report of each case con. tains arguments of the counsels in extenso, extracts and sometimes even full decisions of the lower courts in India. Some of the judgments contained in the series are still of importance to an Indian lawyer. The English language of some of the decisions in the series is excellent. It is a pleasure to read through these volumes; itis also an essential prerequisite for an Indian law- yer who desires to have a firm grounding into the principles of the Indian Law. The series (MIA) starts from 1836 and continues tip to 1972 and consists of 14 volumes in all. These cases have also been reprinted in Volumes 18 to 20 of the English Reports. Thus, it will be ‘seen that all cases of the Privy Council from 1829 to 1873 are contained in Volumes 12 to 20 of the English Reports. From 1872 to 1950, Privy Council's decisions on appeal from India are reported in 77 vol- "umes of Indian Appeals published annually from England under the superintendence and con- trol of the Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England and Wales. Scanned with CamScanner664 CHAP. XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA 9. REPORTS OF THE FEDERAL COURT With the inauguration of the Federal Court of India under the Government of India Act, 1935." an official series of reports, known as the Federal Court Reports. was started in 1939 which continued tll 1949. These reports reported cases determined by the Federal Court of India as well as by the Privy Council on appeal from that Court. Besides the oficial repons, there were unofficial reporis also. The Federal Law Journal was started in 2 i he main object of the Journal was to report the proceedings of the Federal Court and the Federal Leg. islature of India with editorial notes. It was also proposed to publish reports of cases decided by the Privy Council and the various High Court of India on the law relating to the Govern- ment of India Act so as to make the Journal “a complete record of the development of the law of the Indian Constitution.” 10. REPORTS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA : ° With the coming in of the Supreme Court in 1950, replacing the Federal Court,” the Federal Court Reports were reported as the Supreme Court Reports which is the official series report- ing case of the Supreme Court. It is issued in monthly parts and is issued under the authority of the Court itself. The Supreme Court decisions are reported in several other non-official Feports as well, e.g.. All India Reporter reports practically all the significant cases of the Su- preme Court; the Madras Law Journal reports such cases of the Supreme Court as arise on appeals from the Madras High Court. The Supreme Court Journal (SCJ) is the sister publica- tion of the Madras Law Journal. It started publication in 1950. It is published fortnightly. It carries some articles also. The Federal Law Journal which had been functioning hitherto was now renamed as the Supreme Court Journal and to maintain this continuity, the first volume of the SCJ was designated as Volume XIII. Several other reports are also there reporting Su- preme Court cases, viz, Supreme Court Cases started publication in 1969 and is published fortnightly. Other reports tire Supreme Court Appeals and Supreme Court Weekly Reports. 11, DEFECTS OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM. There is in India at the present time a plethora of law reports, Most of these reports are pub- lished by private enterprise for commercial ends. The result is that the quantity of case law being reported at present is far in excess of all reasonable and ultimate requirements. Cases are reported regardless of their value as precedents, such as, cases which have either no legal principle involved, or which involve merely questions of fact, or where it is only an inter- locutory matter with no final adjudication. “There is a good deal of repetitiveness and overlap- ping, the same eases being reported in several series of reports. Thus, the system of law-re- Porting as it operates in India at present is neither efficient nor expedient; it is of enormous quantity but of uncertain and dubious quality. The system is inconvenient arid expensive both Jor the litigants as well as the profession; it involves unnecessary waste of time and labour, ‘and it makes the task of the legal practitioners difficult and confusing. Commenting on the present-day system of law reporting, it has been said by a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that “one is near wilderness, if not actually in it".*° A view has been expressed from time to time that numerous of reports impede the proper administration of justice, and make the task of the judges and the legal practitioners onerous and confusing. An attempt made through the Law Reports Act of 1875 at creating a partial monopoly in favour of the official reports has proved 10 be abor- tive." The creation of monopoly has been opposed all through by many influential persons. Thus. even in 1875, the Lt. Governor of Bengal had opposed the move.” In 1927, a non- official Bill was introduced in the Central Legislative Assembly Proposing to dan the citation of non-official reports in the courts but it could not become law as it was ‘opposed by leading precedents and a large number ‘co A 38. Chapter XX. 39. Chapter XX. 40. Chit hes Das Preface to Mulla's Transfer of Property Act (ath ed), © 42. Chapter XXIX. Scanned with CamScannerDEFECTS OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM 665 lawyers of the day.” In 1958, the whole question was examined by the Law Commission afresh and it came to the conclusion that if the system of precedents being regarded as binding is to prevail, “it must inevitably follow that no suggestions as to the restriction on the publica. tion of reports or the conferring of the right of exclusive citation on an authorised series of reports can arise”. These suggestions ignore the fundamental fact that “the law in a particular matter is what it is not becauge it has been so reported to be but because 1t has been so laid down in the decision of a judge." A Judge is duty-bound to follow the decision of a compe- {ent court whether reported or not. A lawyer is also bound to bring to the notice of the court a relevant decision whether reported or not. . The Law Commission observed: parte conclusion is this irresistible that to permit a system which would restrict citation to a particular series of law reports and exclude others would be destructive of the entice Joc- tine of precedent as we understand it. In such a system, a decision would derive us authority ‘not by reason of its being a decision of a particular vibunal but from the fact of its having been chosen by the reporter, for inclusion in the authorised series."** ‘The Lord Chancellor's Committee on Law Reporting in England pointed out that it was the duty of a judge to follow the decision of a competent court whether reported or not. In India, under Art. 141 of the Constitution, the moment the Supreme Court pronounces its decision it becomes binding on all courts in the country and the fact whether it is reported of not would make no difference at all as to its binding nature, The same considerations apply to the deci- sions of the High Cours, If the fact of reporting or not reporting is irrelevant to the authority of a judgment, how then could it be said that judgments reported in a particular series alone would be binding and not those. reported in other reports. To permit 2 system which would restrict citation to a particular series of law reports and exclude others would be destructive of the entire doctrine of precedent, for such a system, a decision would derive its authority not by reason of its being a decision of a pasticular tribunal but from the fact of its having been cho- sen by the reporter for inclusion in the authorised series. ‘Thus, the verdict of the Law Commission was against creating a monopoly in favour of the official reports. The Law Commission also concluded in 1958 “But it certainly does appear that the view that too many decisions are being reported is overstated.” The Commission how- ever was in favour of improving the quality of the law reports. ‘The non-official reports are thriving, and are being patronised by the profession, because of the inadequacies and short-comings of the official reports. The official reports are expensive and very slow. The non-official reports publish cases much more speedily than the official Teports are able to do and these reports are always in arrears. Some of the unofficial reports have become in fact indispensable to the profession. No lawyer can do without at least one set of such reports. A complete set of the Indian Law Reports of all the High Courts and the Su- preme Court Reports would be very expensive and so a large number of lawyers manage only with a set of private reports, like the All India Reporter. The unofficial reports do meet a badly felt need in reporting as quickly as possible important decisions. The official reports take a long time to report these cases. On the inadequacy of the official reports, and the indispensa- bility of the unofficial reports, the Law Commission observed: “If the publication of this series (ILR) under Government auspices is based on the duty of Government to make the taw appearing in the decisions of the courts available as soon after 1G. Dr. Han Singh Gour made a oreful speach onthe or ofthe Legislative Assembly opposing the Bil. His main argument against the creation ofthe monopaly in law reponing were: nowhere ws We coieee wend er ae Site enjoy the monopoly of publishing ts own law report n England law repos ne pablsted eee Sra butby a cane which has wo monopoly snd sde by side here ex a amber of here eae 2 wel The offical law reports are mast datory i publishing cies, Many cases of the Fray Comme Rerey published in the Law Reports, Indian Appeal Sere, hve not been pbinhed inthe Ree The oneal pene © Eoly Nothing should Be done to intertere wth the healthy compaiion which the pubicaton of paree pene ‘eats and avis inthe dissemination and elucidation of ease la. Also. Caton of “certied cope of tas Ina bt pubised sn England canoe laed reports” and citation of "unauthorized reports not published in Bri “be prevented: see, AIR 1951 JI. 41 44 Law Comm. XIV Rep, 1,639. 48. Chapter XXVIIL | Mb JAIN, Indian Consticutional Law. 151: als9, supra, 660. 1 Law Comm. Report XIV, 636. © Chapter XVII Scanned with CamScanner666 CHap. XXXI—LAW REPORTING IN INDIA i the public, the decisions as possible, to the courts, the profession and the members of the py fos delays ine pabicaon of the sees iicates a grievous neglect of tha uty, Bui for the existence of non-official law repots the judges and the lawyers pracising in te cours would have been for months without any guidance as tothe law laid down by the cours. The Indian Law Reports series as now run and published may well cease to exist without any det. iment to anybody except perhaps to those employed in its publication Nevertheless, there is a good case for regulating, to some extent, the publication of so many unofficial reports, and improving the quality of iaw reporting therein. Though itis neither sssible nor desirable to eliminate private reporting completely, yet some selectivity of cases Bbe reported is a desderatum, The present day multiplicity of private law reports should somehow give way to a few sets of quality reports which may adequately meet the,legitimate needs of the lawyers As the Madras High Court stated in Re The All India Reporter: “The whole system of law reporting requires... rationalisation, simplification and coordi- nation, We find sometimes duplication and triplication, the same judgment being reported in two or three different law journals... great care should be exercised before any case is re- Ported by which subordinate courts and posterity should be bound until it is modified or over- ruled” Adverse comments are thus made from time to time on the system of law reporting in India. According to the Law Commission, the worst sin of the unofficial law reports in India is in- discriminate reporting of cases. “A large number of cases laying down no legal principle but deciding questions of fact and others reporting well accepted and trite law find a place in these reports." The one effective way to eliminate, to some extent, private law reports is to im- Prove the quality of the official reports and to make them more economical. The evil of multi- plicity of private reports, and lack of selectivity in cases reported therein, can be reduced only if patronage of the profession is transferred from the non-official series of reports to official Feports, and this can happen only if they fulfil the needs of the profession more adequately than what they do at the present time. So long as these goals are not achieved by official re~ Ports, private law reports are bound to be there to serve the needs of the legal profession, In England, a significant step to improve law-reporting was taken in 1865 by establishing the Council of Law Reporting. It has later incorporated by a royal charter. It is a body com: prising of Barristers representing the Inns of Courts and the Law Society, with a few ex- Officio members. The Council publishes a series of veports of a very improved quality which are good as well as economical. The series starts from 1865. These reports are known as Law Reports. Lord Lindley makes th¢ following comment on the Council:°' “The Council is the distinguishing feature of our improved system of law reporting. The ‘system is thoroughly English in its constitution and working. It is not founded on any abstract. principle, it has no legislative authority, it has no monopoly: it exists because it is useful and supplies a professional want...” But even with the establishment of the Council, publication of private reports has not com- letely stopped in England. Some of the well-known private reports are Law Journal Reports ww Times, Weekly Law Reports, the Times Law Reports. All England Reports, etc. How. ever, on the whole, the law reporting in England is very much better, and much less wasteful, than what it is in India at present, To improve the quality of official reports, the Law Commission suggested the e by the legal profession itself of a Council of Law Reporting in each State and one fer te si. preme Court, to publish law reports. The Council should consist wholly of the members of the legal profession. The State may have to subsidise the Council in the initial stages. The Con {mission was convinced thatthe publication ofa proper series of law reports by a body like ihe Council “will go a considerable way in mitigating the existing evil” Thy i Sested that “once such law reports are published the Courts may well insi Of a ule that the case to be cited should only be from the reports published by the Councils of Law Reporting if itis reported in that series”. These reports would embody all the essentials prepeetierrtn Sfne eT 49. AIR 1951 November 9, See, AIR 1951 11.8, FL UGab Lote he Huy of a ’ |. . The History of Law Reports. (1885) eis MoaLawiay, 19 of Law Reports, 1888) 1 LOR 136. 142, Scanned with CamScannerDEFECTS OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM 667 ofa good law report and serve as a model for unofficial law reports." The Commission em- ptasized that it i as much the duty of the State to publish judicral decisions. which are expo. sitions of the law ex non scripto, as to publish the statutes, the lex ex scripto, For various rea~ sons, the State has been unable to discharge this duty. “It is clear therefore that if law reports ase to be efficient and speedily published the task must be entrusted to a body independent of Government”.”* The Law Commission also suggested cessation of the publication of the In- dian Law Report series. Even with the establishment of these Councils, the need for unofficial Jaw reports will not be obviated. Accordingly, the Law Commission suggested repeal of the Law Reports Act, 1875. The Law Commissign accepted the need for unofficial reports but desired their quality of law reporting improved.” bring out a set of Revised Reports for the period covering ‘lilty. The underlying idea was to reduce the bulk of as old reports are now extremely difficult to get. The aints. See. ILI, Working Paper on the Scheme for Re- ‘Reporting, supra, note 3, at 222; also see Ch. XXXI, infra, Scanned with CamScanner