R DAYANANDA SAGAR Vs. VATAL NAGARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A judgment of the final Court of the land is final. A review of such a judgment is an exceptional phenomenon, permitted only where a grave and glaring error or other well-established ground id made out. Unfortunately, the theoretical possibility, successful in a microscopic rarity of cases, has led to frequent, unfounded and indiscriminate petitions, almost as a routine sequel to a defeat in Court. The present review petitions fall under the latter category and fail by the former test and are therefore dismissed.

(2.) Shri Asoke Sen made a limited submission on behalf of Dayananda Sagar in CMP 2095 of 1975 that certain observations in the judgment almost branding his client as an unindicted criminal - guilty of abetting forgery and purjury - were altogether unmerited and should be obliterated. While we cannot agree to this course, we admit that these strictures are in no way integral to the decision, although relevant if we take an overall review.

(3.) It is true that the words used are strong and we felt then that they were warranted. After hearing both sides we deem it meet to soften the judicial blow. Shri Sen submits that we were misled in reaching the inference drawn. Maybe, we were. Judge Learned Hand once said that the spirit of liberty is 'the spirit which is not too sure that it is right'. That great Judge was 'fond of recalling Cromwell's statement:'I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that ye may be mistaken'. He told a Senate Committee, 'I should like to have that written over the portals of every church, every school and every court-house, and may I say, of every legislative body in the United States. I should like to have every court begin 'I beseech ye in the bowels of Christ, think that we we may be mistaken'. (Yale Law Journal:Vol 71; 1961 November part).