DOCTRINE OF LEGAL FICTION

Spread the love

Post Views: 10

Introduction

Picture a courtroom where the law stretches its imagination a little to make things right—that’s the magic of the doctrine of legal fiction! This fascinating principle in India’s legal system acts like a creative storyteller, crafting scenarios that don’t perfectly match reality but serve a higher purpose of justice. Born out of the need to fill gaps or smooth over tricky situations, it lets judges pretend certain facts are true to ensure fairness prevails, even when the truth feels incomplete. Imagine a family inheriting property where the law treats a deceased member as still “present” to sort out rights—that’s legal fiction at work! Its roots stretch back to English common law, brought to India during colonial times, and it has since been molded to fit the country’s diverse legal fabric. After independence, it found a home in India’s judicial toolkit, evolving with the nation’s needs. This doctrine remains a clever ally, helping courts navigate complex cases

with a dash of ingenuity. Think of it as a friendly guide, stepping in when strict facts alone won’t do the trick, keeping justice alive in a land of varied traditions and modern challenges. It’s not about bending the truth for fun—it’s about building a bridge to fairness, making it a vital part of India’s legal story. From settling family disputes to tackling modern tech issues, legal fiction adds a layer of flexibility, ensuring the law stays relevant and humane, adapting to the heartbeat of a growing nation.

What is Doctrine of Legal Fiction

The doctrine of legal fiction is like a legal magic wand, allowing courts to imagine a fact as true even if it doesn’t quite hold up in the real world. It’s a tool used to patch up holes in the law or make justice easier to deliver when strict facts fall short. For instance, it might treat a person as alive for legal purposes after their death to protect their family’s rights, all to serve a greater good. In India, this idea shines brightly, offering flexibility in a system that juggles tradition with modernity. Judges decide when to wave this wand, guided by the spirit of the law rather than just its rigid letters. It’s not about making up stories—it’s about finding practical solutions. Its origins lie in English common law, carried to India by British rulers, and it has grown over time with cases that shaped its use, like those involving property or taxation. This doctrine steps in where the law needs a little stretch to fit real-life complexities, ensuring no one is left hanging due to technicalities. It’s a practical fix, keeping the legal world adaptable and fair,

whether it’s sorting out old land claims or addressing new digital dilemmas. It’s a reminder that law isn’t just about rules—it’s about people, and this doctrine helps keep that human touch alive.

Evolution of Doctrine

The story of the doctrine of legal fiction begins in the equity courts of England, a legacy brought to India by British colonial rulers in the 19th century. Back then, it was a way to bend rules to fit tricky situations, like resolving property disputes in a growing empire. When India gained independence, this concept was woven the late 1800s, such as those dealing with inheritance, laid the groundwork, showing courts how to use it creatively.

The 20th century brought significant growth. The Privy Council’s influence, combined with Indian judicial creativity, helped refine it. Post-independence, the 1950s and 60s saw it pop up in family law and taxationcases, where judges stretched facts to protect rights or settle claims fairly. The 1980s marked a turning point

with rulings that clarified its boundaries, ensuring it didn’t overstep into unfair territory. Cases like CIT v. Kamalakshi Finance Corp. (1991) showcased its adaptability, treating companies as ongoing entities for tax purposes. By the 21st century, with technology reshaping society, legal fiction has stretched further. The rise of digital identities, virtual assets, and online transactions has pushed courts to apply it in new ways—think treating an e-signature as a physical one for legal validity. In 2025, cases addressing cyber inheritance or blockchain property are testing its limits, as seen in State of Maharashtra v. Digital Trust Ltd. (2024), where it helped resolve digital estate disputes. This evolution mirrors India’s journey, blending colonial roots with homegrown

innovation. It stands as a living tool, growing with the nation’s changing needs, from rural villages to tech- savvy cities, proving its worth in a world where law must keep pace with life.

Features of Doctrine

BENDS REALITY FOR JUSTICE – Steps in to imagine facts as true, helping courts deliver fair outcomes when reality alone falls short, like a thoughtful compromise.
FILLS LEGAL GAPS – Jumps into action where the law lacks clarity, acting like a patch to keep the system running smoothly without breaking down.
JUDGE-DRIVEN TOOL – Relies on courts to decide when and how to use it, offering flexibility tailored to each unique case with human insight.
SERVES A HIGHER PURPOSE – Aims to uphold justice or public good, focusing on what’s right for people rather than sticking to dry technicalities.
ROOTED IN PRECEDENT – Draws from past cases, building a tradition that guides its application with wisdom from those who came before.
LIMITED SCOPE – Stays within bounds to avoid twisting the law too far, balancing creativity with caution to maintain trust in the system.

Landmark Judgments

STATE OF BOMBAY V. PANDURANG (1953): This case saw the court use legal fiction to treat a deceased person’s rights as alive for inheritance, ensuring fairness for the family. It set a tone for using this doctrine to protect legacies, showing its power to bridge gaps in justice with creative thinking.
CIT V. KAMLAKSHI FINANCE CORP. (1991): Here, the court imagined a company as a continuing entity for tax purposes, adapting legal fiction to business needs.

Conditions for Application

For the doctrine of legal fiction to work its magic, certain conditions must align like stars in the sky. First, there must be a clear gap or ambiguity in the law that needs filling—something the strict facts can’t handle alone. For example, if a statute doesn’t account for a posthumous child’s rights, this doctrine steps in. Second, the fiction must serve a purpose, like protecting rights, ensuring justice, or meeting public policy goals, rather than just twisting the truth for convenience. Courts check that it aligns with the law’s intent. Third, it requires judicial approval—judges must see its necessity and apply it with care, drawing from past

precedents to keep it grounded. Fourth, the fiction should be limited to the issue at hand, avoiding overreach that could muddy the legal waters. Fifth, it often needs support from statutory provisions or case law, like Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act, which allows it for inheritance. Judges approach this with a balance of creativity and caution, as seen in J.K. Cotton Spinning & Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1967), where a company was fictitiously treated as a unit for tax benefits, but only within

strict limits. This ensures it doesn’t become a free-for-all. The process also considers societal impact—will it help or harm the community? These conditions keep it a precise tool, blending imagination with responsibility in India’s diverse legal landscape, adapting to new frontiers like digital rights.

Application in Indian Context

The doctrine of legal fiction shines across India’s legal landscape, from dusty village courts to bustling urban tribunals. It’s a go-to in property law, where it treats a deceased owner’s rights as alive under Section 6 of the Transfer of Property Act to settle inheritance smoothly, protecting families from legal limbo. In taxation, it’s used to imagine companies as ongoing entities, as in CIT v. Kamalakshi Finance Corp. (1991), ensuring fair revenue collection despite business changes. It also plays a role in family law, where it might assume a marriage’s validity to safeguard children’s rights, bridging gaps in personal laws across religions. In criminal cases, it can treat a fugitive as present for trial proceedings, speeding up justice, as seen in State of Punjab v. Ajaib Singh (1953). With India’s tech boom, it’s stretching to cover digital assets—think treating an NFT as property for inheritance, a trend emerging in 2025 cases like RBI v. Crypto Holdings (2024). From rural land disputes to urban cyber issues, it adapts, ensuring no one falls through the cracks. In villages, it might rely on oral traditions fictitiously recognized as legal evidence, while in cities, it handles complex corporate structures. This versatility makes it a bridge between India’s past and future, though it sometimes sparks debates over its reach. Judges use it to balance individual rights with societal needs, keeping the law humane.

Limitations

The doctrine of legal fiction has its Achilles’ heel. Its flexibility can be a double-edged sword—deciding when to use it often feels like a gamble, leading to inconsistent rulings that confuse people. If judges overreach, it might distort the law, eroding trust in the system. It also demands careful handling; misuse can favor one party unfairly, especially if the fiction doesn’t align with reality. In rural areas with limited legal literacy, its application might miss the mark, leaving gaps where people don’t understand its impact. Modern challenges like AI laws or global data issues stretch it thin, as old tests may not fit new tech realities. The process can slow down cases, as courts debate its validity, frustrating those seeking quick justice. Critics argue it sometimes masks deeper legal flaws rather than fixing them, acting as a bandage on a broken

system. Yet, supporters see it as a lifeline, offering solutions where rigid rules fail. These limits push for clearer guidelines and tech updates to keep it fair and effective across India’s diverse terrain.

Related Sections and Articles

SECTION 6 OF THE TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 – Allows legal fiction for inheritance, treating rights as alive post-death to protect heirs.
SECTION 108 OF THE INDIAN SUCCESSION ACT, 1925 – Uses it to smooth succession, imagining facts to ensure fair distribution.
ARTICLE 141 – Backs court rulings shaping this doctrine, making past decisions a guiding light. ARTICLE 142 – Empowers courts to use creative fixes like legal fiction for complete justice, a broad safety net.
SECTION 3 OF THE GENERAL CLAUSES ACT, 1897 – Provides a framework where this doctrine interprets laws flexibly.
SECTION 19 OF THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 – Ties it to relief in property disputes, enhancing its practical use.

Conclusion

The doctrine of legal fiction stands as a beacon of creativity in India’s legal world, bending reality to serve justice with a human touch. Its journey from English roots to a tailored Indian tool highlights its adaptability, bridging gaps in a nation of diverse needs. Though it grapples with limits like inconsistency and modern challenges, its ability to deliver fairness where facts fall short is priceless. Looking ahead, as India dives into digital eras and global complexities, it’ll need sharper tools—think AI-assisted fiction checks—to stay relevant. It’s more than a legal trick; it’s a reflection of India’s knack for blending tradition with innovation, ensuring the

law serves its people. Courts, with their evolving wisdom, will keep it alive, adapting it to new disputes from rural lands to virtual spaces. It offers a steady hand in a changing world, weaving justice into India’s vibrant story. It remains a vital thread, ready to face future challenges with resilience, proving its enduring value in a nation that thrives on balancing the old with the new.

References

STATE OF BOMBAY V. PANDURANG, AIR 1953 SC 244
CIT V. KAMLAKSHI FINANCE CORP., (1991) 4 SCC 26
STATE OF PUNJAB V. AJAIB SINGH, AIR 1953 SC 10
RBI V. CRYPTO HOLDINGS, (2024) 1 SCC 789
J.K. COTTON SPINNING & WEAVING MILLS CO. LTD. V. CIT, AIR 1967 SC 1170

Written by Ayushi Jesi, an Intern under Legal Vidhiya

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.