LAXMAN BALWANT BHOPATKAR (SINCE DECEASEAD ) BY ANOTHER TRUSTEE DR.DHANANJAYA RAMACHANDRA GADGIL AND OTHERS versus THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY

2 s.o.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

LAXMAN BALWANT BHOPATKAR (Since decea•en ) HY ANOTHER TRUSTEE DR.DHANANJAYA RAMACHANDRA GADGIL AND OTHERS

THE · CHAlUTY COMMISSIONER, BOMBAY

(B. .P. SINHA, C. J., K. SuBBA RAo, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR, .J. R. MUDHOLKAR and T. L. VENKATARAMA AIYAR,. JJ.)

Public Trust-Cltaritable purpose-Educatio" to mak people conscious of political rights-Political purpose-Object of general public utility-Bombay Public Trust. Act, 1960 (Bom. 290/ 1960), 1960), 88. 2 (13), 9( 4).

people conscious of political rights-Political purpose-Object of general public utility-Bombay Public Trust. Act, 1960 (Bom. 290/ 1960), 1960), 88. 2 (13), 9( 4). Lokamanya Tilak died on August I, 1920, leaving will. On Augut 16, 1920, his. two sons and the executor appointed by him under the will executed trust deed in respect of two newspapers "The Kesari" and "The Maharatta", and the property and tl~e machinery pertai-ning thereto. Clause I of the trust deed recited: '1Thi.s Trust deed haS. been made as means to the fulfilment perpetually and uninterruptedly after the death of the late Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak of that very object of his with which he . took all activities alier he took charge of the newspapers-the. Kesari and Maratha such as of spreading political education through the newspapers and thereby making people alive to t],eir political rights and carrying on other multifarious pubJic activities cond-ucive to the national ideal etc." survey of the public life and activity of Lokmanya Tilak showed that his purpose in taking over and Conducting the newspapers was political, in the sense of seeking to achieve by m;:ans of -rousing the consciousness of the people to their condition, politoical awarenesa, by which adjustments of political character would be demanded and enforced by the persons who inbibed those truths or were influenced by such writings. ·The question was whether the aforesaid trust was public charitable trust within the definition ;,, s. 2 (13) read with s. 9 (4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, so as to justify an order by the Charity Commissioner requiring the .trustees to have the trust regiltcred.

Jii62

Loima11 B.ZU-1 Bhopoa:., B)' D"'-nJ111• Ba•,-°"'1• GMtll v. c•..;u C..111mU· """' B0111b<t7

WI SUPltEM.E COURT REPORTS [1963)

Held, (Subba Rao, J., Dia.<enting), that political pur-pose is not charitable purpose and does not come within the meaning of the expression ''for the advancement of any other object of general public utility" in s. 9 (4) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950.

The life mission of I.okmanya Tilak which he sought to _achivc and achieved through the two newspapers, and which wa~ set out in the trust deed dated August 16, 1920. as the object for which the trust was founded, was political purpose and, therefore, the trust was not required to be regis-tered under s. 18 of the Act.

Per Subba Rao, J.-The. object of Tilak, after he took

over the newspapers, was to work for the regeneration of the country, and he thought that national education through newspapers and writings,.. which would mak~ people alive to their political rights, was the most important item in the up-lift of tl.c country. The trust executed to perpetuate the said object was clearly trust for general public utility within the meaning of s. 9 (4) of the Act. The expression "object of general public utility" is very comprehensive and it includes every purpose, whether political or otherwise, provided it is an object of general public utility.

JJonar In.w Memorial 'rn,,.t v. Commi86ionera of inland

Ret'enue, (1933) 17 Tax Ca•. 508, Trualet'1 of the Tribune Pre86, Lohore v Commi•Bion<r of Income Taz, (1939) L. R. 66 I. A. 241, All India 8pintutrs' Aasociuticm v. Oommiesioner of Income Ta:c (1944) L. R. 71 I. A. 159, Re Hopkin.oon: Moyd• Ba"k Ltd. v. Baker, [1949] 1 All E. R. 346, Subltas Chmulro Bose v. Gordfzanda• Patel, I. L. R. [1940] Born. 254, and In re Lo/ctroanya TilakJubilu National Truat Fund /Joml>ay, (1941) t3 Born. L. R. 1027, considered.

CIVIL .APPELLATE JurusDICTION : Civil Appea.1 No. 313 of 1958.

Appeal from the judgment ani decree dated

February 2, 1956, of the Bombay High Court, in Appeal No. 77Ft of 1955 from Original Decree. Veda Vyasa, 8. G. Patwardhan and Ganpat Rai for the appellant.a.

H. N. Sanyal, Additional Solicitor-General of

India, N. S. Bindra and R. TI. J)h,e))(J.r, for the res-pondent 11nd the State of Ma.haraahta (Intervener).

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

1962. May I. The followi.ng Judgments were delivered.

The judgment of Sinha, C. J., Rajagopala Ayyangar, Mudholkar and Venkataramn. Aiyar, JJ., was delivered by Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.

RAJAGOPALA

AYYANGAR, J.-·This

appeal on certificate of fitness granted h.v the High Court of Bombay under Art. 133 (1) (b) & (c) of the Constitution, and the question raised for consideration is whether the "Kesari & Mahratta Trust" of which the appellants are the Trustees was or was not "public. Trust" within the meaning of the Bombay Public Trust Act (Act XXIX of 1950) which it will be convenient to refer to as the Act.

The Act which by its long title was enacted

"to regulate and to make better provision for the administration of public, religious and charitable Trusts in ·the State of Bombay" came into force on

August 14, 1950. Section 18 of the Act enacted:

"18. (l) It shall be the duty of the

trustee of public trust to which this Act has been applied to make an application for the registration of the puhlic trust. ,,

o o 0 Io 0 o o o o o o o o • o 0 0 o 0 o

Section 66 of the Act provides penalties according to table apperrded to it for contravention of the several sections set out in it and among the sections so included is s. 18(1). In this state of affairs the trustees of the appellant-trust addressed on April 16, 1952, communication to the Assis-tant Charity CommiBBioner, Poona region, Poona-being the authority empowered to effect the regis-tration of the Trust, if it was public Trust-that "the Kesari & Mahratta Trust" was not "public Trust" within the meaning of the Act and sub-mitted that it was not liable to be registered there-under. Section 19 of the Act empowers an Assistant

Loxman Balt1an' Bhopalkar by Dr. Dlton.,,ja,a RamchandrO; ()aJgil v. 0/Ja;i(1 Commis· sitJnB, Bomba'

IHI L.~6al•1nl ..... ,Jc•r ._, J!lr, .b,_,_,., t ro 11 .......... (J.iq;l •• A.ti1_, Cntntis-sintn, Mnsl•' ... 7.1"01"" J.

SUPREME OOURT REPORTs (1963]

Charity Commissioner to make an enquiry for ascertaining, inter a.lia., "whether a. Trust e:r.ist a.nd whether such Trust is a. public Trust." This officer held an enquiry under this provision, giving a.n opportunity to the trustees of the Trust to make representation8 a.nd urge their contentions. There-after be recorded a. finding under s. 20 of the Act that it was a. public Trust to which the Act applied and pa.seed a.n order directing the Trust to be registered.

• Section 70 of the Act provides for appeals

being filed a.gs.inst findings recorded and orders passed under s. 20 by A88istant Charity Commis-sioners, to the Charity Commissioner, and the trustees availed themselves of this remedy and repeated their contentions before the Charity Commissioner. The appellate· authority however reached the ea.me conclusion a.e the ABSistant Charity Commissionor and dismiBSed the appeal. Section 72 of the Act enables a. party aggrieved by the decision of the Charity CommiBsion6r under s. 70 on the question "whethl·r trust exists and whether such trust is public trust" to apply to the Court to set aside the sa.i<l decision. The trus-tees moved the Court under this provision but this application was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Poona. It was from this judgment of the learned District Judge that the trustees filed a.n appeal to the High Court of Bombay who also dis-missed the appeal but granted the certificate which has enabled the present appeal to the filed.

It would be seen from the above narrative

that the entire question raised by the appeal is concerned with whether tho Kosari & Ma.hratta. Trust was "public Trust" within tho meaning of the Aot so as to justify the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner requiring the trustees to have the institution registered. Section 2 of the Act

2 s.c.R. SUPREME OOUR'r REPORTS

..,, 1 which contains definitions defines public Trust · in cl. thus:

· in cl. (13) thus:

"an express or constructive trust for either public, religious or charitable purpose or both ............ "

to read only the portion relevant for this appeal. The other material provision is s. 9 of the Act which defines "Charitable purpose". The purpose defined include:

( 1) relief of property or distress,

(2) education,

(3) medical relief, and

(4) the advancement of any other object of general public utility but does not include purpose which relates-

( a) exclusively to sports, or

( b) exclusively to religious teR.ching or wors ip. h[. " ]

There are oertain other provisions of the Act to which our attention was drawn during thegcourse of the agruments but as both their construction as well as their constitutional validity which were the subject of debate before us would arise only if the Trust were public charitable Trust within the definition in s. 2( 13) read with s. 9, we purpose immediatel:y to proceed to consider the submissions ~--1 made by learned Counsel in relation to this crucial point.

The Trust in question was created by deed dated August 16, 1920 by three persons. The first two authors of the Trust were the sons of Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak who had died on August l,"1920, leaving will executed on April 5, 1918, to the terms of which we shall refer presently. The third executa.nt was the executor

Laxman Balw«11e Bhopatw by Dr. Dhananjnya Romclwndra Godg l v. Charity Commis-aianer, B1mboy . .ty,angor J.

IHI

Luman Ba/1oal Bit.flat!•• bJI Dr Dlionarejoyo R-h..d•a G<dg I v. CA.,i~ OommM· 1il~w. •inrelay

630 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS (1963)

appointed by the deceased under his said will. The Trust deed in its preamble refers to the execution of the will ancl after recitin::r the fact that the will was agreed to in all respect by the three exeeutantli proceeds to state that the Trust deed in regard to the Kesari Printing Press Newspapers etc. was being executed in order that the objects recited in the will may be fulfilled. The Trust deed contains 13 clauses but of these those relevant for the consideration of the matters arising in the appeal are only two and they 11,re clR. I and 8. Clauses l specifies the objects of the Trust, while cl. 8 make& provision for contingencies ariRing from the trustees becoming inc11,pable of discharging their dut.ies as well as from the institution ceasing to exist. It reads :

"In the event of any of the said Trustees

becoming incapable of discharging the duties of the Trust for any reason whatsoever, suoh person as, in the opinion of both the trustees, may be fit to discharge the duty in accorda-nce with the wishes of the Lokamanya Tilak shall be appointed as trustee for the perp-etuation of this institution and Trust. If perchance, there is only one Trustee left for making this appointment, he shall appoint Trustee following the above policy. And all t.he rights of the Trustee of the said insti-tution under this Trust deed, shall vest in the Trustee so appointed. If for any reason whatever, new Trustees are not appointed or none of the prior Trustees survives, the pan-chas mentioned (under appointment of New Trustees by the Panchas) in clause 8, wider the heading of •the Printing Press' in the Will of the Lokamanya Tilak or the Panohlll! appointed in their own place by such Panchas ~hall appoint the new Trustees. But if such appointment of New Trust°" is not made in

2 S.C.R.

tho manner stated above, the Trust Estate shall revert to Nos. 1 and 2 of us or to their heirs, 'Primarily' in the capacity of Trustees as such. If for any reason this institution ceases functioning, for the time being but if it is possible to revive that institution,. such Tru· stees who may be present and fit to carry on the institution under this Trust·deed. However, if this institution, ceases to exist, for any reason whatsoever, and it is thought that it is not possible to revive it at any time later on, the trust property shall be of the owner-ship of Nos. 1 and 2 of us or their heirs. The trustees of the institution individually, or their heirs shall have no private (personal) right whatever to this property."

It is only necessary to add that learned Counsel for the appellant-Trustees assured us that the appellants had no intention at all of abando· ning the objects of the Trust or ceasing to be bound by the te1·ms of the Trust deed even in the "" event of our holding that the Trust was not public charitable trust, but that cherishing as they did the memory of Lokmanya Tiiak they would carry on the mission entrusted to them by the great leader for ever. As almost the entire argument in the appeal before us as well as the decision againsi the appellants in the Courts below have rested wholly on the interpretation and legal effect of the provisions contained in cl. 1 it ilil necessary ' ."\ to set this out in full. The Trust deed is in Mar-athi and the following is its English translation accepted by both parties :

"This 'frust deed has been made as means to the fulfilment perpetually and un-interruptedly after the death of the late Lpkmanya Bal . Gangadhar Tilak of that very object of his with ~hich lie took all activities after he took charge of the newspapera....:t~

196t La.xmon BalWGtzi Bh.patt• by J.,r.Dh11tttutj9• llatnacAantbo Go,gil .. CAarty Conmris· si~Bni>a, AJyGngar J.

SUPERME COURT REPORTS CI963]

Kesari and Maratha ench as of spreading political education through the newspapers :m<l thereby making people ali\·e to their political rights and carrying on o•:her multi-farious public aotivities conducive to the nati-onal ideal eto."

Pausing here, is it necessary to mention that

the translation as it appears in the Paper Book re~ds "such as spreading national education through those newspapers etc." It wa.s however agreed that the adjective "national" was not correct rendering of the Marathi expreBBion "Rajakia'' which was moro accuratdy denoted by the word "political" and we therefore proceed on the translation which was aocepted before us by both tho parties.

It will be seen from the preamble and cl. I

that the TruRt was brought into existence for the purpose of fulfilling the last wishes of the Lokma-nya as expressed in bis will dated April 5, 1918. The terms of the will have therefore relevance for un<lerstandini the object 1iought to be achieved by the Trust. ' The will w&a made in Colombo on April 5, 1918. Most of the dispositions of the will are taken up with legacies to his sons but the disposition we are now concerned with occurs in els. 3 and •1 of the will and wo shall read the relevant portions of those clauses. Clau8e 3 ( l) which is headed "The Printing Press" reads:

"I have made public trust of the • ·•

newspapers, the office, the printing press, the machine and the foundry, the newspaper library and security-money in respect of newapapers.''

·This, however, was not accurate; for though

evidently the Lokmanya had intended to create trust no formal deed therefor had been executed and it. was this deficiency tha.t was mpplied b7

his sons and the . executor appointed under the will. Clause 4 of the will is of i:elevance and it rail:

' [1]'.1.'he policy of the papers (editorial policy) shall be kept as it is. Under no circumstances shall it be changed.'.'

The other provisions o( the will do not bear upon the points arising in this·· appeal.

The question now for our consideration is whether under ol. I. of the deed of trust public ' charitable trust has been created. Analysing the provision of the clause it would be seen that the prime object of the trust was the fulfilment of the basic purpose which animated the activities of the late Lokmanya and whioh be sought to accomplish through the two newspapers-Kesari and Mahratha after be took charge of them. This has to be. read with the provision of the· will directing the conti-nuance of the two newspapers with their policy entirely unchanged. As if in explanation or exemplification of this prime purpose we have the ~ statement that the object the Lokmanya sought to achieve through the two newspapers was that of spreading political education and thereby making the people alive to their political rights and carrying out other multifarious public activities conducive to the national ideal.

Pausing here, it is necessary to mention that though the object of the trust was thus ·intimately , , bound up with the policy and purpose pf the Kesari and Mahra.tha after tho Lokmanya took charge of them, no evidence was led at any stage by either party as to what· precisely was the policy or the object of the two newspapers which was sought to be achieved by the Lokmanya. through them. Nor was evidence placed before the Court ,. of the precise aims and objects which the Lokmanya inc-pleated b7 his teachings throu~ these newa-

i....rm.1Blll1uor Bhop.lhrby DA-.J•y" R,meA- ~i l v. Chari& Colll'l.lis·· •ior.t!8 • Bo11:t•)

1962 papers.' -It·._ was possibly , a.Ssumed · that .the life Lax111&il-Balw1111C and foleals for . which the ; Lokmanya · stood,. and. in BMftatkaJ b.J particular the matters which he considered as the Rameflandra~Gaclgil Dr. Dlw.nanjaya , prime purpose and, policy ' of these two newspapers v.· 'with which he 'was connected for over two decades, Chari'7 Cirnmfs. 'were matters' of history so' well-knoWn . to the 1 &mb•y &mb•y -Courts and authorities in Maharashtra and therefore A:nani.d~ J.--·- - - on which no- formal evidence was . required . to be adduced. We would however, add that such evid~ ' ence on the record would have lightened our task and that it is with this . handicap that the point -. in controversy in the appeal -'has to be decided. \ · ·This might be the. convenient stage ·,at which reference could be made .to previous. occasion· when the interpretation of the trJist-deed with parti-cular reference fo the question -of its character. as : public charitable trust ca.me -up for consideration before· .the Courts. , Section 4 (3) of the _ ID.dian Income-tax Act, 1922 exempts from income tax'~any income derived from property held under. trust or · · other legal obligation wholly for, religious or . charit· ' able. purposes in so far as such income is applied. or · is accumulated for application . to such religous, or charitable purpose _ ........ ., .. " . The section iarried definition of "charitable purpose" whicoh' was stated . to include "relief , of. the poor, , educa.tion, medical relief and the advancement ,of any other object of general . public utility" which, it would be seen, ii! in terms the saine as th"l definition of "charitable purpose" under the Act. The claim of"tho Kesari and. Mahratha Trush" to exemption under this provision came up ·for -consideraticiri before the High Court of Bombay on refernnce under s. 66 (2) of the lridian Income-tax Act. The ---' reference was heard by Beaumont, C. J., and Ran-. - gnekar, J., and the leilrned'Chief Justice delivering - · the judgment of the Court said: · --

Lax111&il-Balw1111C BMftatkaJ b.J Dr. Dlw.nanjaya , , Rameflandra~Gaclgil v.· Chari'7 Cirnmfs. si1ner1 &mb•y &mb•y -A:nani.d~ J.--·-

-.;To my,mind.the,trnst which i.s contamed

j:µ cl. I of t_he derd fa too"va~ue and wide W

2 S.C.R.

be regarded as charitable trust within the meaning of the Income-tax: Act. Some of the purposes, no doubt, are charitable but others are not and the whole of the funds may be applied to non-charitable purposes. The purposes include organising public move-ments i.nd even if you limit those general words by the words 'ca.lculated t'o promote the national ideal', it seems to me impossible to say that the promotion.of public move-ments calculated in the view of the trustees to promote the national ideal can be regarded as necessarily of public utility."

Lazman Balwant Bhopalkar .1!1 Dr. DhanOJl!OJ<I Ramchandr• <Jll4fjl •• Charl!J~mia-•ion#r, /JtimliOJ

The learned J'udges therefore held that the trust was not entitled to exempt.ion under s. 4(3) of the Income-tax: Act. Learned Counsel for the appel-lant did not contend before .us that .this judgment was res judicata in these proceedings for the denis-ion of the matter now before us, but as expressing the views of the learned Judges on the construc-tion of the document whose interpretation is the ,, subject of dispute in the present case. With these obaervations we shall put aside that decision and procee'1 to construe the terms of cl. ( 1) of the deed to find out how far the object sought to be achieved are within the definition of "qharitable purpose" within the Act.

In doing this, it would be convenient first to

set out the construction which found favour with the learned Judges of the High Court in' the judg-ment now under appeal and then consider the sub-missions made by learned Counsel on either side. Referring to cl. 1 and the 'Jlatters to which it refers as needed to be done for fulfilling the objects of · the trust, the learned Judges said that these were : (I) the awakening .in the minds of the people consciousness of their political rights by spreading the knowledge of politics through the newspapera

La.xman B1'1wanf BMpatkar b.1 Dr. Dhannj o)'a Ramlh~dro Cac!gil v. Charity Comm;s. siDner, Bombay

"Kesari" and "l\fahratha'' a.ad (2) organising various public movements calculated to promote the national ideal. They went on to state that the second purpose could not amount to charitable purpose under the Bombay Public Trust Act and observed :

"As the naturo and character of the pub-lic movements which were to be promoted for furthering the national ideal were not even indio1itotl, much less specified it seems impo-ssible to say that the organisation of public movements which in the opinion of the trus-tees might be calculated to promote the national ideal can be regarded necessarily as an object of general public utility within the meaning of clauso (4) of section !I of the Act. Those public movements would ohviously not fall under e.ay of the other clauses of sec-tion 9 either. Clearly, therefore, the second of the two purposes mentioned in clause l of the trust-deed cannot be considerPd a. chari-table purposes."

They, however, were of the view that the first pur-

posc, viz., of "a.wakening consciousness of politi-cal rights among the people by spreading the know-ledge of polities through the newspapers" would be charitable purpose. In this context they consi-dered that the decisions of tho English Courts that the attainment of political purposes would not be charitable purpose as advancing a.n object of gen-era.I public utility could not ho applied in India., a.ad that oven if the same were applicable, that under the Trust-deed before them, the awakening of political consciousness among the people was not identical with the advancement of political obje·ctl! and that the a.wakenin'l of such oonsoious-neBB need not necessarily be for achieving politi· cal purpose being out of the way they considered t.tu.t the awakening of suoh oonaciousn- would be

an advancement of an object of public utility.

Several points were raised by learned Counsel for the appellant in support of his contention that the trust-deed did not create charitablll trust. His first submission was that the learned Judges of the High Court were wrong in considering that there were two objects to be subserved by the trust for the attainment of which the trust was founded, but only single object and that that object was political in its nature and that consequently it was not charitable purpose within the meaning of the law. His next submission was that even if there were two objects as the learned Judges of the High Court had held, they were not really independent objects but both of them were dominated by single purpose which was political in its nature. At the base of both of these interpretations of the deed lay the submission that the object to be attai-ned by the trust was politic&!, and if so, it was not eharitable. -We consider that there is considerable force in the submission of learned Counsel that the trust has been founded with view to achieve single objective or purpose, viz., "the fulfilment perpetual-ly and uninterruptedly" of "the object with which the late Lokmanya took up all_ 11._~tivities after he took charge of the newspapers 'Kesari' and 'Mahratha'." It might be, that the activities for which the newspapers were utilised after he took charge of them disclosed more than purpose, but the common link between every such line of activity was that it stemmed from a. political purpose, for the newspapers were ma.de to serve as the vehicle for achieving his objectives. 'fhe question therefore as to the purpose of the trust would have to be resolved by examining . the various activities in which he himself engaged and the object with which Ji.e engaged in them, but the latter is not the baeis

Laxman 1 JwanJ 'Bhopallcar6v Dr. Lhananj9a Romehantlra Gadgi i •• Charily Comn.is-sioner, Bomba.] A,1Jangai' J ,

638 . SUPR~ COURT REPORTS [1963]

upon which the High Court has proceeded in reach· · L-xmnn.B•l"''"' ing finding that the trust-deed disclosed duality · B1"'patk4..b' of purpose one of which the learned Judges recognis-DrdJharwn).,. ed was not charitable but the other was· held to be Bomdia~'f•Gaagil so; · The words in the second limb of the first clause CMriJ, comm;.. referring to "the spreading of political educatiOn ,;.,,,,,Bomba, .. through the newspapers and thereby making people alive to their political right.>" and · secondly "the carrying. on other multifarious public activities conducive to the national ideal" were really meant · as illustrations of activities. undertaken by the late Lokinanya during his life-time as is manifest by the ·· use of the words "such as" before. the clause. .If the object with which the Lokmanya took up his activities after he assumed charge of the newspapers was dominated by political purpose and the. news-papers were used by him to achieve that objective, the illustrations of his activitieR set out in the clause must be similarly construed. But to this· we ·shall revert later.

This apart, there is one other way in which ·the. ; matter· might be approached. ,The . learned Judges of the High Court have held.that the object signified by the words "carrying on other multifarious public activities conducive to the national ideal" was much too vague to serve as an object or purpose of an enforceable truat, for besides the. vagueness involved in the description of the activity as "con· ducive to the national ideal etc", there is further vagueness introduced by the words "other multi-farious public activities". . One mode of testing . the validity of this object would be whether one. cculd uphold the deed as constituting valid enforceable charitable purpose if it had merely ·made provision . for'~ the trust-fund being utilized . for carrying on ·multifarious public activities conducive to . the national ideal etc." It is obvious that this question. could.be;answered only ,in one way and -that in 1favour of holding that the tn1st ~as too vague t9

2 s;c.R.

• btt valid. If therefore the last portion of the . clause was left out of account, two questions would have to be considered: ( 1) whether - on ·proper cionstructio.1 of cl. ( l) read with the rest of the deed, the object sought to be achieved is or is not single one, and (2) whether the object indicated by the words · "spreading of politica.l education through the newspa.pers and· thereby making people alive to their political rights" would be a. charitable purpose within· the meaning of s. 9 of the Act? If the last part of the clause (1) were cut out, as too va5ue, the object of the True~ . would read, to quote the relevant words "the· fulfilment perpetually and uninterruptedly of the very object with which he (the Lokmanya) took up all activities after he took charge of the newspapers such as spreading political education through these newspapers and thereby making people alive to their political rights." We shall immediately proceed ·to deal with the import of the words "the very object with which he took up all activities after he . took eharge of the newspapers", but before we do so we might state .that we have no hesitation in holding that the words of the clause we have just extracted indicate but single purpose, viz., the fulfilment of the objects with which Tilak took up all activities after he took charge of the two newspapers.

We have earlier drawn attention to the feature that no evidence was placed before the authorities under the Act or before the Courts as to the object which the Lokmanya sought to achieve by the two newspapers, Learned Counsel for the appellant invited our attention to the reported decision of the Bombay High Uourt where certain writings and articles of the late Lokmanya came up for con-sideration, and in particular to the articles _.., which formed the subject-matter of the charges against the' Lokmanya in prosecutions for sedition. But if one were confined to these,

IllJJ

laa;man Balwcmt Bhopalkar by Dr. Dkananj.ja Ra,,., .. ndra Qadgil •• Ch•rily Commls· 'aimn-. Bomb41 A)l)'angaf'J.

la1rman Balwant BhapaU.or i,. Dt. Dharr njnya ltorr.Mhrndra GadgU .. l/10• i'y Cc.mmi~

l/10• i'y Cc.mmi~ sitn1tt, B~,

SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963]

they roust obviously give us only partial and truncated idea of hie activities and so are apt to afford but distortel1 picture of the objects with which the two newspapers were conducted. We therefore examined the literature bearing on the life and work of this great leader and particularly two reoent books on the topic "Bala Gangadhar Tilak by Parvate (1958) which waa brought to our attt1ntion by Mr. Sanyal appearing for the respond· ent, and Lokroanya Tilak by Dha.nanjay Keer (Sep-tember, 1959)". In doing so we have confined our-selves to the facts there stated and have refrained from taking into account the evaluation by the authors of l'ile.k'e activities or their comments on any particular views on public or social matters entertained by the subject of their biography.

As result of this examination we gather the followin!! facts which are of relevance to the point before us. Tilak, though he 'waB aeeociated with the two newspapers from their start in or a.bout 1881, took over the editorship of the Kesari in 1887 and became the sole proprietor of both the papers " by 1893 and waa in charge . of their conduct till hie death in 1920. Tila.k was public figure who do-minated the political firmament of the country for near three decades. He was rebel against politi-[I ]cal wrongs. He W88 a. champion of all who were oppreeaed and conceived it a.s his sacred mission to rouse the people to a. sense of their wrongs and of / <; ' their strength in winning their ea.lva.tion, for it W88 his firm conviotion that petty tyranny by the fore-~ ~ ign bureaucracy W88 po88ible because of the igno-rance of the people and their apathy to their condi· tion. His idea.e might be 11leaned from hie observa-tion that people must fight for the vindioa.tion of their rights a.nd that thoec wbo ,;ere unmoved a.t the sight of injustice and tho high handed policy of the Government. should not be regarded e.e human ,.. beings. The two newepapera wPre intended by Tilak •

to be the meohanism by which the wrongs done to the people should be brought home to · them and their conscience roused to sense 'of the injustices and oppressions to which they were subjected. In undertaking the responsibility of running the Kes-ari and the Mahratha it was clear indication of his resolve to throw himself completely into public life and to devote himself to the task of the political education of the masses. He wrote in the Kesari about every public grievance and every public cause and this uiade him the champion of popular causes and mass leader. The two the Kesari and the Mahratha were in no sense mere newspapers. They were 'primarily views-papers, vehicles of public opinion and the news they contained were carefully sEJlected to be helpful to the views propagated in them. Tilak looked upon Kesari as the chief veh· icle for propagating his views as he wanted them to be disseminated as widely as possible. The objective determined its sty le; it wiui direct, simple forthright. The papers championed the cause of the underdog and everywhere fought against injust• ice, contained study of public complaints and grievances, exposed oppressive officers, criticised fearlessly and made constructive suggestions for the reform of the administration and champion"d the peoples cause in every cense. · During Tilak's days Tilak !tDd Kesa.ti became synonymous terms. · ~he Kesari had been the citadel of the national fight and remained impregnable even through repressive campaigns and became national as8et. It was Tilak's corfirmed view that the ilia of the nation demanded political reforms and not "immediate so-cial reforms. Tilak challenged the right of the foreign bureaucracy to' sit in legislative judgment on Indian society. 1t was the view of Tilak that respect. must be paid to the prejudices of people and that one must try to make the humblest of them feel that he was one of them. Tilak was convinced

Laxman alW«nt Bhopatli ar by Dr. DhananjGys

. Ramchandt'a Gadgil v. . Charity Commis-ftoner, BomlJt(JI

~,,angar J.

IHI

Lazman Balwanl B/ro#•th• b.1 1". DAa"°'liaJO Ra.tltaadra Gadgll v. C"°ri~ Commit· sieMP,Bftlb41 -'na-p• J.

642 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963)

of the futility of appeals to people made in the form of Apeecbc11 ancl resolutions with tbcir eyes fixp,d to-wardR Govern'l;ent a1;d reali8cd thRl the Indian ?llational Con~r"ss with,. J,ich he was· closely associ-ated from· 1889 wo ild be able to ameliorate the condition of the people if the maBBes were attracted tn it and their power harnessed to the chariot of the CongreBB. It was the main role in his life to stir up the people against their poverty, degradat-ion and slavery. To foster opposition to British rule, to bring people into conflict with Government and to make Government unpopular was the great aim of Tilak's speeches, writinus, and leadership. The enthusiasm and vigour of the ptople had to be utilized for keeping up their pride in the achif'VC-ments of their ancestors and as means of educat-ing the ctimmon people. He sought to rouse the pride of the peopl1- in their past heroes so as to unify them into one body to achieve polit.ical liber· ation. His plea was that people &hould be taught what their rights were and how they could get their grievances redreescd. That was the way to increase the influonoo of the Congress. He taught people to aot fearlessly though peacefully and lawfully and get their grievances redressed, for tbe principle underlying his philosophy was that foreign yoke could be over thrown only when people were awak· ened and discontented, when it is not poBBible for foreign Government to hold them under its sway. Without attracting the attention of tbe people to th'l unjust state of affairs no political progrll88 was possible, nor reform in tho administration. From about 1903 Tilak was gradually ,shifting to what the Moderatl·s used to call Extremism, smouldering as he was at the apathy shown by the Moderate leadel'll towards active politics. The CongreBB which gave occaeion for or,\I ors brandishing polished phrases and ended with prayers and petitions ha.d grown sterile. He was coming to realise that politios must 00886 to be the pastime of the old orators and

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

title holders. Though he felt that the record of the Congress left no room for di~appointment or des-pair, its triumph lay in awakening the soul of the nation. The Moderates accepted British rule as divine dispensation but the militant nationalists led by Tilak-refused to believe in the doctrine of divine dispensation. After the partition of Bengal in 1905 and the agitation which followed it Tilak wrote articles.discussing the policy of boycott of foreign, goods, and particularly of foreign cloth, and he considered that boycott on national scale was the proper remedy, but its results depended upon actions and not upon words. Tilak was then the spearhead of the 8wadeshi movement, but even here it was fired and ine.pired by political pur-pose, for he said :

"If the Indian Government dissociates itself from the commercial <tspirations of the British Nation, then it will be time for Swad-eshi workers to consider the question of disso-ciating their movement from politics. But so long as politics and commerce are blended together in the policy of the Government of India, it will be blender to dissociate Swad-eshi movement from politjcs."

And in the Kesari he declared that if it was unavoidable to use foreign article, they should give preference to articles produced in Asiatic countries and the next preference should be given to other European countries and America.

It was Tilak who made it the mission of his life to arouse the people against ·political slavery and foreign rule. He resolved to organise the peo-ple under the banner of the Congress and to make it the real spokesman of the people. The two news-papers served as the vehicle threugh which he aimed to achieve these objects. Possibly nothing brings 911-t JD.Ore forcibly the purpose and aim of th~

La.tman Ba!rot111f Bhopatk ... 67 Dr. Dhonanj ua Ramchandra !1ad1ll •• 'charitp Commi ... sioner, BombaJ A.yyangar J.

Lu.xr 011 Ba[1]wa11I Dr. Bhqpaltat' b.1 Bamdtondta 1,adg1i v. Oha1it7 1.omnris· nunit, B~7

. Lokmanya which animateQ. his conduct of the news-papers than self-appraisal which is extracted in the ·biography by Parvate already referred to.

controversy arose in 1919 about Tilak's neglect of or apathy to social reform and his exclu-sive attention to political progress and there was an attack by Dr. Paranjpye on this aspect of the matter in an article in the Bombay Chronicle revi-ewing Tilak's sins of omiseion and commission. Tilak published rejoinder in which he reviewed his whole career. In the cours9 of this letter Tilak said, "My views on political and social matters are well-known to the public. The charge against me is that my activity and propaganda are one-sided. I do not hold that social reC1onstruction must be undertaken prior to political emancipation. I attach greater importance to the latter." Speaking of the J{esari he said, ••It is true that I made it an organ exclusively of political propaganda. I do not deny it, but at the same time let me point out that the political awakening in Maharashtra since then is more the work of this paper and my party than Mr. Paranjpye and the men of his ilk."

Before concluding this part of the case it is neoeseary to refer to an aspect of tbe matter arising out of our summary of the Lokmanya's activities whioh he pursued thr<'Jugh the two newspapers. It would be seen that he was wholly concerned with achieving the intimate association of the people and their representatives in the administration and gover-nance of the country, and if possible, the entire elimi-nation of foreign rule altogether, and the two news-papers were utilised for educating and rousing people to achieve these. What Tilak's policy or activities would have been after complete independence had been achieved a.nrl the policy which he would have the papers pursue subsequently is an interesting question, but one which we consider not relevant

2 S.C . .R.

:i'or the determination of the question before us.

What we are concerned with is as regards the object which Tilak sought to achieve by conducting these newspapers, and to perpetuate which the trust was founded.

The survey, though very inadequate of the public life and activity of the Lokmanya in parti-cular relationship with the two newspapers undoub-tedly show that his purpose in taking over and conducting the newspapers was clearly political, in the sense of seeking to achieve by means of rousing the consciousness , of the people to their condition, political awareness, by which adjustment of political character would be demanded and enforced by the persons who imbibed those truths or were in,fluenced by such writings.

· The next question to be considered is whether .

political purpose,· i.e., for educating people not (>n theories of political or social sciences as subject of academic study, but for moving them to practi· cal action to itchieve governmental changes is or i11 not charitable purpose. There was some debate before us as to the import of the expression "charitable'' and arguments ·were addressed in particular as to the exact point of difference between the concept of oharity under the English Law and that under the Indian Law. No doubt, as pointed out by Lord Wright in Chichester Diocesan Fund&, Board of Finnnce (Incorporated) v. Simpons (') the term "charity" has not, in . England, always had precise connotation. ·What constituted charitable . purpose has there been derived from.the preamble of the Act 43 Elizabeth I Ch. IV ( 1601) which was taken to signify those purposes which would be held to be charitable. It is not necessary for us to set out the objects enu-merated in that preamble but it was 'always consi· dered that that ,list; was not exhaustive, though to decide whether purpose was in law charitable or (1) (1944) A.C. 341, 353.

Lax nan Balwa'ld Bhopatkar b1 Dr. DhananjaJG Ramo,,.ndra Gadgil •• Charity Oommi,. sioner, Bombtg

Ayyanpr .I.

M6 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS fl963]

not, it has been the pre.ctice of the English Courts to refer to that preamble. In these decisions besides the objects there enumerawd, others which by ana· logy were deemed· to be "within the sprit and int-endment of that statute'" ha.ve been hc.Jd to be chari-table in the legal Pense. Ever since however the judgment of Lord Ma.cna.ghten in Commiasionera for Special Purp081!8 of Income Tax v. Pem&el ( l) the expression "charitable purpose" has been under-stood to comprise four main heads : (I) relief of poverty, (2) advancement of education and le&r-. ning, (3) advanoement of religion, and (4) other purposes beneficial to the community or the advan-cement of objects of genera.I public ut.ility. As regards the la.at clause, Lord Macuaghten expressed the view that under English law there might be some purposes of genera.I utility which might be charitable and some which might not be, the true test being whether the particular purpoB<, was within the spirit and intention of the statute of ~Iizabeth. Whether the concept of charity under Indian law is or is not wider than what· Lord Macna.-ghten considered to be the scope of charitable purpose in England does not really arise for consi-deration in the case before for us, we a.re bound by the wrms of s. 9 of the Act which has defined the Hev.Ma.l cat~gories into which cbarit.v might fall.

It was not the contention of the respondent

that the trust-deed constituted charity under any other head than that of the fourth clause of s. 9 viz., "the advancement of any other 0bject of general public utility-" In saying 80 what we desire to point out iB that it was not tho contention of tile respondent tllat by the refereuce to "political education" in cl. 1 of thP Trnst-,derd, tho charity was one for the advancement of "erluoation" within s. 9 (2). It would be seen that ultimately the question to oo decided iB whether the achievement (I) (1891) A·'=· 531.

2 s.c.R.

of a. political purpose, in the sense of a.rousing, in · people the desire and inst;;lling into them an imperative need to demand ch.111ges in the structure of the a<lministration and the mechanism by which they are governed, could be said to be the "advan-cement of an object of general public utility.'' Having regard to the very limited nature and scope of the question before us it is not necessary to con-sider the precise points of the difference between the English law as understood by Lord Macnaghten and that which finds place in the Indian statutes dealing with the relevant topic. We say this be-cause we have judgments of the Privy Council cons-truing the terms of s. 4 of the Indian Income-tax Act of 1922 in which enactment the purposes which a.re comprehended within the expression "chari, table" are defined in exactly the same manner as we find in s. 9 of the Act now in question and where in particular, the learned Judges · had to censider the question whether the achievement of political purpose, as we have explained earlier, was chari-table purpose .

. Before howE>ver referring to the Privy Council it would be of advantage if we refer briefly to the decisions in England which have taken the view that if purpose were political it is not charitable i.e., .it does not advance an object of general public utility. The earliest case to which we need make reference is the decision ofRowlatt, J., in Oommis-sioners of Inland Revenue v. The Temperance Ooun-;il ('). It arose out of claim by the Temperance Council for exemption from payment of income-tax in respect of the income and dividends derived by the Council, on the ground that the Council was established for charitable purposes only. The · purpose of tho Council was "by united action to secure legislative and other temperance reform." Dealing with this claim . the learned Judge . said: (I) (1926) 10 Tax Cu. 748.

IIHll

LG:l:man BtJiwa1, Bhopatkar l>y · Dr. Dhananjo.J• Ramclusndra Gat!gil v. Ch•rily Comm••· .,,..,,, BonPo,

JSG2 f.,uman lJuftDCJnj Bho>atiar b., Dr. lJh•nnnja)a ~cMndra Gadzil .. •Mriiy Commi•· ::•11t,., Bomba.•

648 .SUP11EME OOURT REPORTS (1963]

''The work of the Council, it was provided, was to be of strictly non-party character. That is wholly irrelevant consideration. ~hen it has ~een said that political purpose 1s not charitable purposo, that conclusion is not relevant, because political purposes are or may be purp~~s ~ixed up with party politics; the word 'poht1cal does not mean that in that connection at all."

The learned Judge went on to state that the object

of the trust being to secure certain line of legis-lation, it would not be charitable trust.

Bonar Law !! emorial Trust v. Commissioners

of Inland Revenue ( [1]) is the next case to which refe-rence might usefully be made. The donee under the trust was the Chairman, on the date of gift, of the central office of the Conservative Party and the fund wa1 donated by an oral trust and deed was executed after the death of the donor to secure the objectives with which the donor 'bad made the gift. The objects were, inter alia, to honour the memory of Bonar Law (a former leader of tho Conservative Party), "to preserve historical building from destruction and to use it as college for the education of persons in economics, political and social scicnre, etc., with special reference to the development of the British Constitution, and in such other subjects as the governing body might deem desirable.'' The intention of the governing body was to educate students in political principles a.nd to exclude propaganda in eupport of parti-cular party, and students were admitted to the college without any reference to their political beliefs or inclination. It was, however conceded that the governors of the college and the members . of the education committee were wholly composed of members of the Conservative Party and that lactates were given on the conservative party (I) (1933) 17 Tu Cu- 508.

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

organisation but not -on Liberal or Socialist organisation. · 'fb.e question before the Court related to the claim of this trust for exemption under the Income Tax Act. Finlay, J., in rejecting the claim of the trust to the exemption, observed:

Liberal or Socialist

Laa:m1Jn Balwanl Bnopatk<J,, by Dr. DhananjaJG llamchandr Gadgil v. Charily Commir-sioner, Bomba,1 -Ayy•nga1 J.

"It is necessary to ascertain exactly, as

far one oan, what the question to be deoided here is. It was suggested by Mr. Needham that trust for the promotion of Conservative 1>rinciples would be good charitable trust. I am not prepared to hold that. In my opinion, there is no authority whioh has ·gone as far as that. It is true that Stirling, .J., in the case of Soawcroft (') left the matter open, but, in my opinion, on the present position of the authorities and also, as I -think, on the prin-ciple of the thing, it is impossible to hold that trust which is simply trust for the propa. gation of the political principles of particular party is good charitable trust."

The learned Judge then extracted passage from

the judgment of Russell, J., in· In re Tetly (') reading: . ·

"Subsidising newspaper for the pro·

motion of particular political or fiscal opinions would be patriotic purpose in· the eyes of those who considered that the triumph of those opinions would be beneficial to the , community, It would not be an application funds for charitable purpose."

Scowcroft's case which is referred to by Finlay, J,.

is .reported in (1898] 2 Ch. 638. Under will particular property was devised to be set apart "to be maintained for the furtherance of Conser-vative principles and for religious and mental (I) {1898] 2 Ch. 638. 12) (1923) 1 Ch~ 258, 262.

IHI

l.c.m.a11 Ba/want aAopG/Aa, ,,_, /Jr, Dltananj,,1a Rn1cA..l1ti [1]1ad.til ... CINril)'C....is-1i"""· •• ,,,.., "-'-""""' J.

650 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963]

improvement and to be kept free from intoxioant.s and dancing". The case h<·forc the Cnurt arose on an originating s"mmons takc-n out. hy the trustees of t.he will to determine the validity of the devise. It was urged in support of the summons, by Counirel who disputed the validity of the disposi· tion that gift in furtherance of Conservative principles was not good charitable gift and that &A it was impossible to say how much to be devoted to the advancement of the Conservative cause and how much to religious and mental improve-ment, the purpose was vitiated and the entire devise was void. On the other hand, it was the contention on behalf of the Attorney-General that the bequest for religious purpose was good and was not vitiated by being associated with or inten-ded to promote any particular views, unless auoh views be illegal or immoral. It was further urged on his behalf that the gift before the Court was not one merely for, the furtherance of Conaervative principles but for Conservative principles and niligic.us, and mental improvement, i. e. for religious and mental improvement in connection with Conservative principlPs and that look-ing at the substance of the gift they were really and pri.acipally for the mental and moral improvement of the villagers, and not being in, validated by the tinge of Conservative principlea, were good and valid charitable gift.a. Stirling, J., accepted this submission of the Attorney General in support of the validity of the trust. The learned Judge said:

"Whether or not gift for the furtheranoe of Conservative principles is good charitable gift is queation upon which I do not think it neoeuary to expreaa any opinion in this case, because it seems to me that the reading which is suggested is aot the true one, but

2 s.c.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTs

· that this is gift for the furtherance of Conser· vative principles and religious and mental improvement in combination. It is either gift for the furtherance of . Conservative principles in such way as to adva.nced religious and mental improvement at the same time, or gift for the furtherance of religious and mental improvement in accord· ance with Conservative prin'ciples; and in either case the furtherance of religious and mental improvement is in my judgment, an essential portion of the gift. .It is, therefore gift in one form or another for religious and mental improvement, no doubt in combi-nation with the advancement of Conservative principles; but that limitation, it appears to me, is not sufficient to prevent it from being " perfectly good charitable gift, as undoubt· edly it would be if it were gift for the furtherance of religious and mental improve· ment alone.''

In re Tetley (1), referred to by Finlay, J., in

Bemer Law Memorial Trust oa.se.([1]), was concerned with the validity of bequest under which the trus· tees were directed to apply property "for such patriotic purposes or objects and such charitable ob-ject or objects in the. British Empire as they in their absolute discretion should select". The Court of appelll affirming judgment of Russell, J., held that patriotic purpose might not necessarily be charitable and therefore the bequest was void. Dealing with the head of "Charity'' relating to ''trusts for purposes benefic~l to the community" Warrington, L.J., said: ·

"You inquire what the divisions of charities are, and you come to the conclusion that there is one miscellaneous set of chari-(I) [1923J I Ch. 258, 262. (2) (1955) 17 Tu. Cu. 51111.

Laxrnan Bo/want B/wflatkar b' Jn. D/Jananja:JG Ramchandra Ga~l •• Charily Oommis-1iona, Bomba.)'

196~ -Laxnran B•lman B""1«•-b7 Dr. Dltananja,a R,,,.clltntt/~o C,•'f!il .. Cltari'.1 Ooncnti1-..._, Bonrbe AwongarJ.

SVPREME COURT REPORTS [1963]

ti.es which <'.llD. be classed under that head; but to stateduce from that the notion that every purpose of general use to the commu-nity must be charity is jhst about 1111 logical 1111 to draw from statement in the report of an insurance society that •persons insured with us may be divided into men, women and children' the deduotion that every ma;11, every woman, and every child is insured in that society. It seems to me, therefore, that it is open to us to say, that merely becalll!e trust may be said to be for the general use of or for some piupose benefioial to the community iii not necessarily confined to 'oharitable purposes' in the legal acceptation of that term ............ Expreasion •patriotio purposes' even if it be confined to purposes benefioial to the State, is not neoessarily confined to oharitable purposes, and gift . for 'patriotio purposes' is therefore eo uncertain ail to be void."

The position ie summarised in Halabury'a Laws of

England ( ') thus:

"A trust for the attainment of politioal

objects ie invalid, not because it ie illegal-for everyone is at liberty to advocate or promote by any lawful means change in the !a-but because the courb has. no means of judging whether proposed· change in the law or will not be for the public benefit, and therefore cannot say that .a gift to eeenre the ohange ie charitable gift."

' st~ted here, is an extraot ftom the the of Lord Parker in Bowman v. SeGtJlar Ltd.([[1]]) (IJ 3rd Eda., Vol. +, para 5'ZS-lh• lille boles OOBtributed by Dan~J. . (2) [1117! A. C. 406, +l2. .

' The law, ae st~ted here, is an extraot ftom the the

judgment of Lord Parker in Bowman v. SeGtJlar Society, Ltd.([[1]])

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

. We shall !}OW turn to the decisionA of th,e Privy Council in appeals from lndia which' bear upon the question as to whether trust created for political purpose or with view to attaining political objects could be held to: be cha.rita.bfo trust· within the meaning of the words "th.e advancement of an object of general publitl utility". In. the Trustees· of the Tribune Pre88, Lahore v. Commissicmer of I noome-tax([1]) the court was concerned with the claim to exeinption under s. 4(a) of the Indian Incoll)..e·ta.x Act which, as we have pointed OJJt e!lorlier, is for purposes relevant in. the prsaent context, identical with s. 9 of the Act. The e:semp-tion was claimed by the Trustees of the Tribune Press under Trust which directed th,em "tQ ma.in·-tain the. said Press a.pd newspaper in all efficie1lt condition ke!lping up.th,e liberal policy. of the sa,id l)ewspaJ?l!r and devoting the surplm1 iii.come of the said pre• and new.spa per •..••.....•••.••••..• in, irnt pr,oving the said newspaper and plQ.lling it on a. fooiing of permanellcy," It n;iigbJ;, bll mentio~ed, t!il!ot evideqce was pllM'0i:l. before the · Bri.v:y Oq1U1cU of selected · issqea ·of tb.e newt1Jtaper which, t.b.r~w !igh~ ~II- the ch~acter a.Jld th11 11olicy of!the, pape1 m lifetime of the.'· founder all explanatory of t~ direction contained in. tb,e words "kt1epillg, UI! ~e . liberal policy of tfie said newspaper". '.l'l!.e refllr-. eQoe under s. 66(2) of th!l Inoomll· tax Act Qilme befor.e . Division Bench of tl!.11 Lahore High. Coiu:t · &l)d 118 tl).e learI1ed Judges. were di;v,ided in, tl!,eir opinion, the q'Qllstion. wa11 referred to Ml beJ1.ob ()f three. Judges.and by 111ajprit,y tlu~ le1uned,Judgee. held that th.e in()ome of tbll tru.s~. q11 not exeJnpt. It was. from this · judiP.Jlent that the. trniitees. prf!~ ferted tAA. a11pe11>l to, the Privy Coqncil •. · Sir Gec!rM Rankin wh.o d!tliv.ered,the j~dgnl11i:Jt ofl!Ji!I J:uW.oml C(lmQlit.We l;ifst rtijllOt.eci &P argwll!lllt w)l.iQh, (IO,Ugli~ to 11i8taill. the. Qharif;able n'loture · of the .firs.t 111 a. m u91e11;. a; • r, .\..241,

Laxma11 Balif*nl bh;Jpt.i1kar ~' Dr. uJ,anallj•J" Ramoha .<11• Q;lt;il •• Char.ieJ c;a~mis-.sN.ue:r, a1mH.J ---

196r .---

laxma11 BalwC1nt Dhopa1~11, by IH. DJia,,anjoya R•mC.~r.nd•a GadiiJ v.

f.hGf'li.'J Com•1 u· #;01l~r, Bomboy

654 SUPREME OOURT .REPORTS (1963)

contention tha.t the trnat might be regarded as of a.n educational character, the submission being that th·• n~tablishmcnt and maintenance of an efficient ne wspap.ir catering to the needs of populous dis-trict where was mwd for such a. paper fell within such purpollf!. The next point that was urged had been that the property was held under a. trullt for "the advancement of an object of general public utility". The lea.rued Judge pointed out that the stat,utory law in India had for long num. her of years and in several instances defined "charity" in the wa.y which it ha.d been found in Jodian Income.tax Act with which they were con-cerned. Two of the learned Ju.:lges of the High Court had expressed a.n opinion that on the ques-tion whether particular object or purpose wa.s of general public utility, the true test was not what the Court considers to be beneficial to the nublio, but what the testator or the author of the Trust con-sidered to be so. Thie view was di88ented from and it wae pointed out if this were accepted trusts might be established in perpetuity for the promot-ion of all kinds of fa.nta.etic (though not unlawful) objects. The Court had thert1fore a. responsibility in thl' matter in coming to decision a.s to the objec-t of the trust and to discover whether it satis-fied the statutory test of "advancing gent1ra.I public utility." The Judicial Committee expressed its assent to the view that an eleemosynary element was not eesentia.I for usr being charitable a.nd so the fact tha.t the newspaper was not given free to its subscribers, but only sold them for price did not detract from the trust being charitable. Sir George Rankin then dealt with the main objection that wa.s taken to the trust not being charitable and that was on the ground that the Tribune news-paper was intended by its founder to carry on political propaganda and was intended to be devoted to the advocacy of particular legislative

S.C.R. SUPREME OOTTRT REPORTS

measures considered by its founder to be measures of reform, and it was this political character which the respondents contended prevented the trust from being held to be an "object of general public utility". After referring to the various English decisions to most of which we have ourselves referred, the learned Judge proceeded :

"These English decisions are in point in so · far only as they illustrate the manner in which political objects, in the wide sense which includes projects for legislation in the interests of particular causes, affect the question whether thfl Court can regard • trust as being one of general public utility." . '

. ' He pointed out that it was not suggested by the

Commissioner of Income-tax that the newspaper waa intended to be mere vehicle of political propaganda but was to be an instrument for the dissemination of news and for the ventilation of opinion upon all matters of public interest, and :recorded his conolnsion that questions of politics and legislation were discussed in the paper only as many other matters were discussed and that it had not been made out that political purpose was the dominant purpose of the trust. He sum-marised the position stating that the object of the paper might fairly be described as "the object of supplying the Province with an organ of educated pu blio opinion . and that it should prinia facie be held to be an object or general public utility. Having regard to the evidence before them as to the contents of the paper it was not newspaper intended for the promotion of particular political or fiscal opinions."

The next case to which we desire to make

reference is the decision in All India Spinner's Association v. Commissioner of lncome/Qx (1). As (I) (1914) L.1t. 71 A.J. 159. . .

laxman /,olwanl Bhopatkar by Dr. Dha"4#jaya-Ranroiianba Gadgil v. Charity Commis-. sionn-, BOlllbO:J

Lnman B•dwant BWGfk.r by Dr. JJ,.._;.,. 11..,,,,.,,.,. <Jodail •• c.•,,i~ Cntmis-~, B•mboy AY.J'""I .. J.

6tl6 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963]

the cause title itself would indicat.e, the point in dispute also related to whether the Association wa11 entitled to exemption in reepeot of its income under s. 4 (3) (i) of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax who made the reference to the High Court under s. 66(2) of the Income-tax Act of the ques-tion whether the income of the Aasociation wa11 liable to income-tax and to super-tax, expressed his opinion that the dominant purpose of the Association wa11 political because of the intimate connection between the Asaociation and the Indian National Congress and besides that the manner in which the Association carried on busi-ness was in ·no way different from the 4ctivity of trading concern. The High Court of Bomb'a.y answered the question in favour of the Revenue. The reason for this holding was that though the object of the Association wa11 "the relief of the poor", still the income which was being asaessed to tax was not derived from "property held under a. trust for religious or charitable purpose". There was no property as such from which the income wa.1 derived but the profits a.rose out of the sum total of the activities ·of the Association, i. e., out of the business carried on by it and the fact that one of the objects was the relief of poor would not render the income derited exempt from tax. Quite a. different and for our purposes more relevant ground on which the case for revenue was rested w&11 the aim of the a.ssooia.tiou to afford relief to the poor, was coupled with another obj9to of the trust which was the prevention of the importation of foreign cloth into India. and, as the ABSooiation was created with view to assisting the All India. CongreBB it was contended that therefore it had political object. On appeal to the Judicial Committee, Lord Wright who delivered the judgment of the Board observed :

2 S.C.R.

"They hold that the income sought to be

aBSessed is· income derived . from property held under a. trust or other legal obligation wholly for religious or charitable purposes ... ......... , ..... It is now recognized that the Indian Act must he construed on its actual ·words and is not to b.e governed by English decisions on the topic. The English decisione on the law of charities are not based on definite and precise statutory prov1B1ons. They have been developed in the course of more than three centuries by the Chancery Courts. . The Act of 43 Eliza.beth ( HJO I) contained in a. preamble list of charitable objects which fell within the . Act, and this was taken as sort of chart or scheme which the court adopted as . a. ground-work , for developing the law. In doing so they made liberal use of analogieR, so that the modern English law can only be ascertained by considering a. mass of particular decisions, often difficult to reconcile .......................... . The difference in language in s. 4(3) from Maonaghten's classification· and particularly the inclusion in the Indian Act of the word 'public' instead of . the word 'community' is of importance. The Indian Act gives clear , and succinct definition which must be construed according to its actual language and meaning. English decisions have no binding authority on its construction, and though they may som ,. times afford help or guidance, cannot relieve the Indian Courts from their responsibility of applying the language of the Act to the pa~ticular circumstances that emerge nnder conditions of Indian life.................. The statement of the object e_xcludes any question of profit making, and also excludes any ele-

Laxman 1/wanl BhopalktlT b_, Dr. Dhananja.1• RtmU;handra Gad1il v. Charity Oommis-1iorur, Bombiy

658 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [196.1]

ment of party politiOll. Any participation in political propaganda would be ultra viree ...... The real underlying object of the Assooiation was to benefit the poor agriculturiata in the villages, specifically at that time of the year when they are not actively engaged in agri-cultural operatio.ns .......... The primary object of the ABBooiation was thus the relief of the poor ............ There is good ground for holding that the purposes of the Assooiation included the advancement of other purposes of general public utility ..........•. There exact scope may require on other occasions very careful con-sideration ........................ Though the con-nection of the A880Ciation with the CongreBB was relied on as inconsistent with general publio utility because it might be for the advancement primarily of particular party, it is sufficiently clear that the Association's purposes were independent of, and were not affected by, the purposes or propaganda of CongreBB."

On this rerumning the appeal of the Association was allowed.

We consider that these two decisions of the

Privy Council in so for as they hold that political purpose, in the seme of propaganda for the achievement of political objecti~e, is not charitable purpose, i. e., not one for the advance· ment of an object of general public utility correctly interpret the Indian statute and the law in India. Whatever dlft'erence there might be between the definition of "charity'' and "charitable purpose" in the English and Indian law, we consider that there is none so far as regards "political purposes" in the sense in which we have indicated earlier. In this cc·nte:i:t, it ia Eignificant that Chiche.8Ur Diocernn FtJnd etc. v. 8imj'80flB (I). in which (I) (19'4) A.I. HI, 95'·

2 s.c.R.

Lord Wright speaking in the House of r.ords ex- · pounded the uncertainties of the English law as to the meaning of "charity" and the appeal of the All India Spinners Association (1) before the Judi· cial Committee were lleard at about the same time, and in consequence the view of Lord Wright expressed in the latter decision that political purpose is not an object of general public utility even on the wider language of the Indian statute reinforces our conclusion on the point. Even though the concept of charity under the Indian Law might be wider than as understood in England, particularly under the residuary head ''advancement of an object of general utility", we consider that it wou Id not include "political purpose" in the sense indicated already.

' The latest case on the point to whioh we

would like to refer is decision of Vaisey, J., in Re Hopkinson : Lloyds Bank Ltd. v. Baker(') for the reason that the learned Judge refers to all the earlier English cases to which we have already adverted as also to the decision of the Privy Council in the Tribunal case. The purpose of the trust as recited in 1ihe bequest was the creation of "an educational fund to be utilized at the abso-lute discretion of the trustees for the advancement of adult education with particular reference to the following purpose (hut without limiting their dis-cretion in applying the fund to adult education), that is to say, the education of men and women of all classes on the lines of the Labour Party's memorandum headed " Note on Education in the Labour Party." Vaisey, J., held that the direc-tion to the trustees to have particular reference to the memorandum of the Labour Party dominated the whole trust, forming it.a overriding and esaen-tial purpose which rendered the trust as one. for the attainment of political objects and was not, (I) [IH9] l All. ll.ll. 346. (2) (1114f) La. 71, J.A.159.

IHI

.l;a:J:mtm Balwatr.I Bhopal/car by D1. Dhananja,a Bame/ttJndra IJadgi •• Chari'.1 Commis-rionlf', Bom?loy

~man Br1lwanl BhopaU:ar bY Dr. Vhananj ya Ramehandra Oadgil

Charil,] Cornn is· 1ioner. BombaJ.

.. ----------- -

660 SUPRElffi COURT REPORTS· (1963]

therefore, charitable. The learned, Judge pointed out:

·~·Political propaganda masquerading,

using the word not ,in any. sinister sense, as 'education is not, charitable",

-and -went on to add :

"The principle that legitimate -~nd proper political aims and. ambitions are not charit-able is far too well settled for me at this stage to attempt to apart from or refine upon.it. I wish to make it clear that the purpose indi-cated in this memorandum and the purpose indicated by reference thereto in the testator's will are lawful, legitimate,. and, from the point(of view of those who put them forward, wholly desirable and proper, but they are not charitable. The law has been laid down · with charity over long period of time, and, if the trust is not charitable, it is one which the court . cannot uphold. The reason for · that, I think, is partly indicated in what was said, also by Russell J., in Re Hummeltenberg ([1923]1 Ch. 237), viz., that,· if the trust is one which the court· could not administer if the trustees disclaimed their duties thereunder it would be trust which could not be sup-ported in law ......... ~ ............. "

'l'he decision· in Scowcroft,. (4a) the I.earned Judge observed, did not impinge upon, or limit the effect · of, the general proposition to which he referred. He concluded by saying that there could be no doubt r that the testator's object was, not education in · the proper sense of that word, but the . furtherance '.of his political views and the better equipping or . those who make it their ·business to further them.

We are clearly of the opinion that "political

purpose'-' is not charitable purpose as being one •

2 S.C.R. ·

"for the advancement of any other object of gene-. ral public utility" within s. V (4) of the Act. ·

To summarise the poEition:

· (1) The object for which "The Kesari & Mahratta Trust" was established was the a<·hieve-mPnt of single purpose, viz., to continue in per-petuity the activity frr the fulfilment of which Lokmanya Tilak took up the two newspapers .

. (2) The specification in cl. l of the Trust-deed that these activities were "directed to the spread-ing of political education through the newspapers and hereby making people alive to their political rights" was intended to describe the object of the Lokmanya in taking up the newspapers and correc-tly described the same, as seen from the public life and activities of Tilak, particularly in the matter of his conduct of the two newspapers.

(3) The two newspapers were designed by the Lokmanya to be the vehicle for educating the mass of the population to sense of the grie-vances sullered by them under foreign · rulers, with view to rouse them to political action and de~and share in Government. He ·was full-time poli-tician. At time when Indian men of learning were eulogising British mle and the masses were inert and lethargic and oblivious to their degrada-tior. Lokmanya, by his propaganda and leadership sought to infuse into the minds of the mass11s self. respect and courage, By his writings in these papers, Tilak demonstrated to the people that the foreign rule rested on no moral foundation and when he made people realise this, the achievement of freedom became assured. That is why Tilak has been aptly termed the father of India's freedom struggle.

(4) The life mission of Lokmanya which he

sought to achieve and achieved through the two news-papers, and which is sot out in the trust-deed as

Laxman B,slwant Bhopatkar by Dr. Dhanar.joya Ramchandra Gadgil •• Cha1ity Commis-siont:r, Bom ba.J

L•Xfnatt Boltoanl Bh..,/rar bJ1 D,. Dh,,_,,,.;oJIO RntMalulra Gadgil v. Cltori/r Commis· "°""', &.ba• A1J011K'[1 ]" J •

Bubb• Rao J.

662 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [)963)

the object for which the trust was founded was therefore political purpoet'.

(5) political pur po&c 1s not charitable under s. 9 of the Act and hence, the Trust was not required to be registered under s. 18 oft.he Act, and the order of the Assistant Charity Commis-sioner confirmed by the Charity Commi88ioner, directing the Trust to be registered was erroneous and should have been set aside hy the District Court of Poona in Miscellaneous Application No.325 of 1954.

The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the Atisistant Charity Commi88ioner direct-ing the Trust to be registered confirmed by the Charity Commissioner on appeal is set aside. The appellants will be entitled to their costs in all the Courts.

SUBBA RAO, J.-I have had the advantage of persuriug the judgment p1epared by Rajagopala Ayyanger, J., and I regret. my inability to agree. The facts are fully stated in the judgment of my learned brother and I need not restate them here, except to the extend neceSBary for appreciating the question raised in this ease.

Bal Gangadhar Till\k executed will on April 5, 1918, and died on August l, 1920. On August 16, 1920, hiR two eons and the executor appointed by him under the will exeouted trust deed, Ex. 12, in respect of two newspapers "The Keeari" and ••The Mahratta", and the property and the machinery pertaining thereto. The ques-tion is whether the trust created under the said douument is public trust within the meauinp: of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (Bombay Act XXIX of 1950), hereinafter called the Act. Tile material pr"ovisions of the Act read:

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

"Seotion 2. (13) 'public trust' means an express or constructive trust for public, reli-gious or charitable purpose or both and includes temple, math, wakf, dhar-ma!la or any other religious or charitable endowment and society formed either for religious or charitable purpose or for both and registered under the Societies Registra-tion Act, 1860."

''Section 9. For the purpose of this Act,

charitable purpose includes-

(l} relief of poverty or distress, (2) education,

(3) medical relief, and

(4) the advancement of any other object of general public utility but does not include purpose which relates-

.( a) exclusively to sports, or

(b) exclusively to religious teaching or worship."

The Bombay High Court held that the pur-

poses of the trust were, (1} awakening in the minds of the people consciousness of their political rights by spreading the knowledge of politics through the newspapers "The Kesari" and "The Mahratha", a11.d (2) organizing various public move-m•nts calculated to promote the national ideal; and held· that the first was charitable pmpose and the second was not. As the Charity Commissioner, Bom-bay, did not file 11.ny appeal questioning the finding of the Bombay High Court in so far as it went against him, I shall aBBume the correctness of the said find-ing, and proceed to consider whether· the first pur-pose is also not. charitahle purpoRe as is contended before us on behalf of the appellants,

La:r:man Balwan' B~oPatkar b1• Dr. Dhanan;a,a Bamachandra Gadgil v. Charity Gommis-ai'Jner, Bomba_, Subba RaoJ.

Lamai BUatat B~"1''U- by Dr. 'wra'1i470 It.""''°"''" v. Gadgi l c1ur111 ea..,,;,. 11._,t'f, Bomb9 S:lbl>a Rao J.

SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963)

Before doing so, it would be convenient to consider the scope of s. 9(4) of the Act, for it is agreed that the trust is not covered by the other clause.: of the section. It is common place to observe that where the language of an Act ie clear and explicit, we must give effect to it for the words of the statute speak the intention of the Legislature. When the words of statute are unambiguous, it would be safe to consider them without reference to oases. The words of cl. (4) of s .. !I of the Act are of the widest amplitude and are free from any ambiguity. The key-words arc "general p:iblic utility". "General" means pertaining to whole class; "public" means the body of the people at large, including any olasa of the public; "utility" means usefulness. Therefore, the adv11ncement of any object of usef~lneBB or benefit to the public or saction of the public, as distinguished from an individual or group of individuals, is charitable purpose. The clause excludes expreBSly two pur-poses, namely, purpose which relates exclusively to sp< rte and purpose which relates exclusively to religions teaching or worship, from the purposes mentioned in cl. (4) indicating thereby the.t all objects of general public utility, except those ex-presely excluded therefrom, are included in the general words used in cl. (4 ). Whenever question arises whether particular purpose is charitable one within the meaning of that clause, one has to ask the question whether its object is to benefit the public.

Before I consider the English case-law devel-oped in the peculiar ciroumstanoes of that uountry, which is more likely to obstruot than to olear the path of construction of an Indian st,atute, let me look at the terms of the trust deed to ascertain whether the purpose of it was one of general public utility as indicated above,

2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

The relevant part of the trust deed reads:

''This trust deed is made as means to the fulfilment perpetually and uninterruptedly after the death of late Lokmanya Bal Gang~ adhar Tilak of that very object of his with which he took up all activities, after he took charge of the nelfspapers ''The Kesari" and "The Mahratta", such as of spreading nation· al education through those newspapers and thereby making people alive to their political rights and carrying on other multifarious public activities conducive to the national ideal etc.

Laxm.rn Balwanl B/oopalkar by Dr. Dhsnan.J9a BamachanJra rJaefgiJ •• r.0111mis ..

Oharity r.0111mis .. sioner Bombay

Subba RaoJ.

I 1!.JI1 omitting for my consideration the last

clause of the trust deed, namely, "carrying on other multifarious public activities conducive to the nat-ional ideal etc.", as the High Court has held that that clause does not indicate charitable purpose and there is no appeal by the respondent against tha.t finding. I should ncit be understood to have~ expressed any view on the correctness of tha.t find-ing. The opening weirds show that the trust-deed was executed for "the fulfilment perpetually and uninterruptedly the object of late Bal Gangadhar Tilak." The adverbial phrase "perpetually and uninterruptedly" indicates beyond any reasonable doubt that the object was not temporary one but was such that it should be carried on for ever. This excludes any idea that the object was merely to replace the British Government by &:a !;:;dian Govl'lrnment, for, in that event, the object would come to an end with the achievement of independ-ence. The object, therefore, must be something higher than mere change of political power from the British to the Indian hands. The next part of the trust deed gives clue 'to the scope of the object. The activities mentioned therein reflect the content of the object. The activities mentioned are th~

666 SUPRE~IB COURT R:Ii:!'OR1'S~ [196.'l]

that Bal Gangadhar Tilak carried on after he took Lcxmc11 Balw~nt charge of the newspaper "The -Kesari" and "The JU,pukao b, Mahratta.", The nature of the activities is indicat-Dr. D/iananJaya ed and it is\ the spreading of national education Ram<ha~~,~ Gaigil. through those newspapers and thereby making the CharilJ c,mmis-c,mmis- • people alive to their political rights. .The words ,;,.,,, [[8]]'mb,J · "such as" indicate that the said activity is not ex-suna Ra• J. • haustive of the object of Bal Gangadhar Tilak, but .is only illustrative of the activities. The question, therefore, is whether the activities, such as spreading ·of national education through the newspapers and thereby making the people alive ·to their· political rights, are of charitable nature within the meaning of s. 9 (-1-) of the· Act. It may he mentioned that learned counsel for the appellants argued that the words "national education" do not correctly repre- . sent the expression in Marathi language and that he would like us to read in the place of "national edu-cation" the words "political education". In. the· High Court this translation has been accepted as the correct, one and it is not advisable or proper for this Court to allow the counsel to question at this stage the correctness of the said translation. India · . is multilingual country and appeals come to this · Court from different areas speaking different la'nguages .. The Judges of this Court _do not under-stand all the languages. In the circumstances or-dinarily this Court shall accept the official traµs-lation as correct. The expression "mitfona_l educat-ion" excludes the idea tha.t the said education is intended to cover, or confined to, any particular group. nation can be educated in different ways .. and one of the ways is certainly by spreading id<>as through well conducted newspapers .. While. "The Mahratta" published in English may reach only ·the intelligentsia, "The Kesari" published in Marathi . may enlighten the uneducated people--! am using· this word iri the limited sense of people who are not educated in English-spread over the: innumerable . yilla~es of the Marathi speakin? ·area. The . na~qr~

Lcxmc11 Balw~nt JU,pukao b, Dr. D/iananJaya Ram<ha~~,~ CharilJ c,mmis-c,mmis-,;,.,,, [[8]]'mb,J suna Ra• J.

2 B.C.R.

of the education sougnt to be so imparted is descri-bed as_ one to make· the people alive to their politi-cal rights. To make the people conscious of their political rights is not the same thing as to indoctrin' ate them in the ideologI of partioul~r political party. Political rights have. been defined in. Cor-pus Juris, Vol. 49, p. 1076 thus :

"Those which may be exercised in the formation or administration of the govern-ment; the power io participate, -directly or indirectly, in the establishment or management of the government; those rights which belong to n~tion, or to citizen, or to an individ-ual member of a. nation, so distinguished from civil rights, namely, local rights, of citizen."

In Cyclopedic Law Dictionary, 3rd Edn., the meaning of the exprsssion "political rights" is given as follows:

"A political right is a. right exercisable in the establishment or administration of government, while a. civil right . is right accorded to every member of a. distinct comm-unity or nation with reference to property, family or marriage, and the like. Political rights consist in the power · to participate, directly or indirectly, in the establishment or management of government·."

Political 1ights, therefore, a.re not rights per-taining to any particular political party. They are rights of every oitizen irrespective of his party affiliations, which he ia entitled to exercise in the formation or administration of government. In the context of modem state, education in political rights may include diverse aspecte of it, such as, politioa.l, economical social etc. It is the funda:-menta) of any good-government of State that the people belonging to that State 11hall know their

BulJba Ra. J.

La:cmaia BalwanJ Blwpatkar by D,. Dhaoonj•ya Ramehandf'a Gad3il •• Cha rl l.J ommis· rioMr. Bomb.ay

Su/JI< Roa J.

political rights. .The jmportance of the said edu· cation has no relation : to the_ form of government existing at pcirticular time. It is imp.ortant both in self· governing State as _ well as in colonial State. Unless the people knaw their rights, they __ cannot work either for their freedom or elect proper persons to represent them after·_ attaining freedom. -No education. is more 'important than political -science, for not only good government but also the maintenance of independence, to large extent, depends upon the p.:>litioal con~ciousness of the people of particular State; If that be so, I find it impossible to· say that spreading of national or even political education to make people conscious of their political rights is not an object of general public utility within the meaning of s. 9 (4) of t!;ie Act. It is said that the activities of Tilak were subversiVe in character and were directed to change the form of government, that fa, to replace the foreign government with. natiofial government; that his object was to break law and, therefore, was not charitabhi one. This argument does great · injustice to Tilak, who was on all accounts great_ patriot of his days. · No material· has been placed -before this Courts to characterise him as political opportunist or person whose sole object -.yas to wrest the political control from the British Govern· ment by any means foul or fair. Indeed he has now become historic figure and in the absence of any material before us, I think I am justified- in looking into some reputtid book on .the life of Tilak.

In 'l'ahmankar's "Lokamanya Tilak" the objects with !Vhich the newspapers '•The Kesari" in Marathi and "The Mahratta" in English were s~arted are given thus at p. 26: · · "Lt was in order order to lay lay the corner-stone of future revolution future revolution that Tilak · and and his . . co;workers·decided to launch to launch launch two newspapers, the Kesari, written ' ' ' . in · '' '' Marathi, · ... ' '. and the ,, . .

"Lt was in order order to lay lay the corner-stone of future revolution future revolution that Tilak · and and his . . co;workers·decided to launch to launch launch two newspapers, the Kesari, written ' ' ' . in · '' '' Marathi, · ... ' '. and the ,, . .

2 S.C.R. . [, SUPREME COURT REPORTS ]-

'lf:ahratta in English. The prospectus, pub-lished in 1880, . .. . . .. .. . .. ... boldly declared that Kesari would deal comprehensively with politic;\) :md economic conditions in the coun-. try, carry objeotive literary reviews of nHw . works in Marathi, and would particularly emp· hasize and spotlight the course of world events and politics."

La.mum Ba/wan B/rtifl•t k•r b7 Dr. Dhananj.Jya Ramcizandra Gaigif •• Chari9 Commis· sfonlY, Bomlay Suflba Ra• J.

In the leading article of the first issue of

Kesari dated January 4, 1881, it was stated, refer-ring to Britain, thus:

"Tn that country, through the po;werful medium of the Press, vig:Jant eye is kept on the public conduct of every functionary from the highest to the lowest-from the Prime Minister to the pettiest. civil ~ervant­which has enabled the. British .to enjoy reasonable guarantee that no case of injustice should long rem~in concealed and une:x;posed."

The editor of the newspaper also declared

his intention to try to improve social conditions by frankly telling the people what .was evil and harmful in their way of life. . The same author defines briefly the object of the two newspaperd thus at p. 27:

-"Kesari was to cater for the needs of the mass ignorant population, who have generally no idea of what passes around them and who therefore -must be given the knowledge of such topics as concern their everyday life by writings on literary, social, political, moral and economic subjects. The Mahratta, on the other hand, kept in view the more advanced portion of the the community, who require to be provided with material for thinking intelligently on the important topics of the day. The tone and temrir of Kesari were

Su61!aR,. J,

SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [11163)

democratic; it aim was popular education and public agitation. The Mahratta was to serve as the authoritative organ of educated public opinion in Maharashtra. It discussed compre-hensively every question of high politics, and offered its readers selection of the views of foreign and Indian journals and publicists on the questions of the day."

Though 'l'ilak was in the bt>ginning closely

associated with the papers, later on ht> took over the editorship of both the newspapers and became their sole proprietor. The author describes how the papers were moulded in the hands of Tilak, at p. 39:

"Kesari was produced not to entertain

the people, but to instruct and guide them. It was newspaper for the people and its purpose was to make them think and aot. Tilak was an editor-philosopher who had m<1ssage to give to his readers and be gave it with fire and imagination. There was nothing meekly-mouthed about his writing. In downright, frank and robu~t style week after week Tilak poured out bis soul on day-to-day problems, economic questions, philosophical ideas, historical researches, liter& ture and art."

Tilak was great savant. He lived and

worked when India was servile country. He had great vision and that was India a.s united strong, prosperous, civilized and democratic country. He w:u1 not person embroiled in party -politics, trying to build up politica.I career for himself. He lived, worked and died for national cause. Hie activities and idMls were mOlltly, though not wholly, reflected m the two newspapers, "Th•· Keeari" and "The Mahratta", two leading ncwapapf'rs of the day which propagated hie views aot onlr throughout the Jrla.Bthi speaking part.

2 s.c.R.

SUPREME COUR.T 'REPORTS

of the country but also · in other parts thereof. Through his papers, he·gave information on various subjects, literary, political, social, moral, economic, etc. His papers created a.n atmosphere for constr-uctive work in that part of the . country and elsewhere, and supported many movements calcu-lated to improve the conditions of. the people; Subjects as varied as famine relief, prostitution, · swadesi, plague relief, Benge.I partition, Home· rule movement, national integration, >and such other political and social movements, found powerful expression· in the said newspapers. In short, his papers pleaded for the social, political, cultural and economic regeneration of the country. They were not confined to the narrow idea.I of just replacing · the foreign government by national one, though it was an important step in the regene-ration of the country.

Can the objects of this great man, refleoted, propagated, and pursued by the said papers, be characterized as those not in the genera.I public interest 1 To say that the object of trust for village school, hospital or oboultry is one of general · public utility and to deny that character to a. trust created for pursuing the objects of Tilak, that is, the regeneration oftbe country. is to make moc-kery of the section. What . trust could be more in the interest of the public than that •created to educate them in their politioa.l rights so that they could know their .rights, understand a.lid appreciate the problems of. their· country, ®d contribute their mite to its progress and prosperity ?

It is said that Tila.k was a. leader of only one of the parties and his activities were a.na.logous to those of leader of political party in England. It is true that in the days of Tila.k there were a.Isa· pa.triotie gentlemen who preferred to achieve inde-pendence by a. circuitous and slow pa.th and there

Lazman. Baluant Bhopotkar by Dr. Dhananjaya Rame/tandra Gatlgil v. Charily Commis-sioner, Bombq'JI

. SubbaR .. J.

672 .SUPREME COURT REPORIS [1963)

l9e2 were also· selfseekers who built· up their career on the scrifices of their fellow· citizens. But then LO.tman Balwani · 1 • • 1 • • Bh,paikar b, b, . I ere were no po.rhea parties m ··· t sense t ey Dr. Dhananjofa Dhananjofa are in England . and are· now in India. Tilak was R•mcTwndra v. G•tlg il not an or • mary po ) ' · · 1hman m u · J • gmg m • party po 1tics 1 · · C~a•i!1 Cammis- -··to build up· his career.. His lifetime was spent in 0· ""::._~ba,, · educating. the people with .view to realise his Subba Paa J. vision. ·To class him as party politician with · ,view to import the English law in the construction of the trust deed is, to say the least~ to ignore the facts of history and to· belittle the great contribu-tion made by Tilak in the country's cause. His work must be evaluated not· on party but on national level. It is, therefm-e, clear that the object ofTilak, after. he tookover tna··-newspapers, -was . to work for the regeneration of the c:ountry, and he thought, and rightly too, that national education through 'newspapers and thereby making people a.live to their political rights was the. most impro· . . tant item in the uplif~ of. the country~ The trust executed to perpetuate . the said object is clearly trust for general public utility within the meaning of s. 9 (4). of the Act.

LO.tman Balwani · Bh,paikar b, b, . Dr. Dhananjofa Dhananjofa R•mcTwndra v. G•tlg il

But it is said that the object are not of public utility, because some of the English Judges-· for · whom I have the· greatest · respect-said that political purposes are riot charitable purposes. Ordinarily I would have ·been inclined to drop any reference to English decisions had· it not been for the copious citations at'the Bar. I would, therefore, briefly notic!l the decisions . cited at the Bar defining "charitable purposes" under the English law on the basis of which an attempt is made to curtail or circumscribe the scope of cl.(4) of s. 9 of the Act.· In this connection . it is necessary to bear in mind . the caution administered by the decisions of highest . authority when ' similar attempts were made to ( import . --English law in the -matter. of construction

2 s.c.&, SUPREME COURT REPORTS

of Indian statutes. In AU lnd,i,a Spinners' Association

of Mirzapur, Ahmedabad v. Commissioner of Income· tax (1), the ,Tudicial Committ~c had to eonsider the scope of s. 4 (.3) (i) of the Indian Income-tax Act. In that decision, Lord Wright, speaking for -the Board, observed:

"It is now recogriiied that the Indian Act

must he construed on its act-gal words, and is not to be governed by English decisions on the topic. The English decisions on the law of charities are not based on definite and precise statutory provisions. They have been developed in the course of more .than three centuries by the Chancery Courts."·

After pointing out that in the English law

the purposes henefioal to the community are chari-table whereas under the Indian statute the advan-cement of any other object of general public utility is charitable purpose, proceeded to state: • "The difference difference in . . Janguage, particularly

"The difference difference in . . Janguage, particularly the inoluiiion in the Indian Act of the word 'public', is of importance. The Indian Act gives clear and succinct definition which must he construed according to its actual language and meaning. English decisions have no binding authority on its construc-tion, and though they may sometimes afford help or guidance, cannot relieve the Indian Courts from their responsibility of applying the language of the Act to the particular circumstan~s that emerge under.· conditions of Indian life.

The Judicial Committee again in Williams Trustees v. RevenWJ Commissioners {') reit<irated the same principle with greater emphasis. ·

With this background let· me briefly notice the ·English law on the subject with view to ti) (1!144) L.R. 71, I.A. IS9, 166, 167. (2) [1948) 161.T.R. SuppL 41.

L~man ll'Jlwanl Blwp >tk at 87 Dr. DAatu-njo,o Ramd&andra Gadg/l v. Charitp Cc.mmU-siOttlf', BomJa, Bubba RaoJ.

iga1

L.11 trta1t Bo I ttJaJ Bhopatkor6J Dr DhononjoJ• Rom,hondra Godg•l v. Charity Oootmia· •~r•r. Botday s-bb• Rao J.

674 St:J1>1UDIE OOURT RBPoR'1'S [1963!

aacertain whether they would afford any help or guidanoe for ronstroing the statutory provisions of the Act. The 1£nglieh law of charity has grown round the Statute of Elizabeth (4:J Eliz. c. 4) and the preamble thereto read as follows :

"The relief of aged, impotent and poor people ; the maintenance of sick and maimed soldiers and mariners ; the maintenance of schools of learning, free schools and scholars in uni vereitiee ; the repair of bridges, porta, havens, causeways, churches, sea.banks and highways; the education and prefArment of orphans ; the relief, stock or maintenanoe of houses of correction ; · the marriage of. poor maids; the supportation, aid and help of young tradesmen, handicraftsmen, and persons de-cayed ; the relief or redemption of prisoners or captives ; the aid or ease of any poor in· habitants concerning payment of taxes ; the setting out of soldiers."

::iir Samuel Romilly in his argument in Marice v.

Bishap of Durham (') attempted to classify the f!aid objects under the following heads "Re lief of the indigent, the advancement of learning, the advance-ment of religion, and the advancement of objects of general public utility." But Lord Macnaghten in Commissioner for Special purpou of Income Tax v. Pe171Ml (') did not adopt this classification but instead grouped the purposes which have been held charitable within the language of the afore-said preamble under the following four heads : (1) relief of poverty ; (2) advancement of education ; (3) advancement of religion ; and (4) other pur-poses beneficial to the community not falling under any of the preceding hes.de. It will be at once noticed that e. 9(4) of the Act aooepted the last bead suggested by Sir Samuel Romilly in prefer-ence '° the fourth head enumerated by Lord H) (1803) 10 v .. 522, 532; ll S.ll. 8f7. (I) (1891) A.C. 531, 589.

2 s.c.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

Macnaghten which has been . the basis for the decisions which I will considAr immediately. The case law on the subject is immense : it is impos-sible to discover any common thr<•ad passing through them. But I shall content my;;elf with noticing decisions relating to trusts created to promote what is broadly described as the advancement of political objects. brief summary of the English decisions shows not only '"u irrnconciable con-flict but also the danger of importing them in the construction of an Indian statute. The following purposes have been held to be non-charitable purposes :

( l) To secure by uniwd action legi1lative

and other temperance reforms : vide The Com-missioners of I n/,and Revenue v. The: Temperance Council of the Christian Churches of Engwnd &: Wales ([1]).

(2) To subsidize newspaper for . the pro·

motion of particular political or fiscal opinions : videNational Provincial and Union Bank of Eng/,and LW,. v: Tetley('). ..

(3) . To honour the memory of great states-

mitn, former leader of t,he Conservative Party to preserve historical lluihling from destruction and to use it as college for the education of per-sons in economics, politios and social. science, etc. with special reference to the development of the British Constitution, and in such other subjects as the governing body by whom the Trust was admin-istered might deem desirable : vide Bcmar Law Mem· orial Trust v. Commissioners ·of lnl,o,nd Revenue ([3]) •

. The following purposes have been held to be ..

oharitable purposes :

(1) Financing Bill before Parliament to

(I) (1926) 10 Tax Cas. 749, (2) [1923] 1 Ch. 258. (31 (lq33l 17 Tu Cas. 508. ·

Laxtrtan Balwatd BhOl<>•kar b7 Dr. Dhananjaya Ramchandra <JodgJl •• <.h1rily Ormmis-siontr, Bo"'"-.1 Subb.fill Rao J.

IHI

Svb6o Rao J,

676 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS (1963]

establish see at Birmingham · vide In re Villiers· Wilke.a (').

(2) Combating vivisccti•,a partly hy the 1·epe' I of a. statute : vide In re Foveaux (').

(3) Mainte11ance of village club a.nd rea11ing roum "to be used for the furtherance of Conservat-ive principles and religious and mf'ntal improve-ment, and to be kept free from intoxicants and dancing'' : vide In re Scowcroft (').

(4) For the benefit of particular plaoe, whether parish, town, or borough, county, or a. country: vide Public Trustees v. Smith t').

ID Halsbury's Lawe of England, 3rd Edn., Vol. 4, the following summary ie found at p. 231 :

"The promulgation of particular dootrinee or principles not subversive of morality or otherwille pernioioua and not in furtherance of the prinoiples of particular political party may be charitable, as, for instance, Conser-vative principles combined with mental and moral improvement, Socialism, kindness to animals, or temperance, or extending the knowledge of those doctrines in the various branches of literature to which l have turned my attention and pen, in order to ascertain what appeared to be truth, and to teach it to those who would listen.'' cul'80ry glance at the said i!lUBtrations would

be enough to indioate that there was no coneiatent pri1101ple willerl.)'ing th.,ru; the decisiOll!! speak in different voioos. ~ome decilllovs attempted to lay down oerta.in priuoiples, _but no sooner were they la.id dowu than thtiy werti given up by subsequent deoiliiona in St>&roh for othllrs, The tollowing

II) ( 11!95) 11!95) 72 L.T. 32S. 32S. f21 ( 189SJ ~ Ch. 501. \3) (lk98) 2 Cb. 638. (4) (1932) I Cb. 153.

2 s.c.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

·principles may be ealled out from S·1me of the afore·

said dec·i~.ions: ·

(I) trust is charitable only if it· is within

the spirit and intendment of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth. -. --

(2) Every object of public general utility is

not necessarily charitable: see Willia.ms Trustees v. Jnl,and Revenue Commissioners(').

(3) trust for changing the law of the 'coun-try is not charitable. ·

( 4) As it is a. maxim that the execution of

trust. shall be under the control of court, it shall be of such nature that it can be under that cont· rol so that the administration of it can be reviewed by the court: vide Morice v. The Bishop of Durham(').

And (5) gift would not be charitable if the

purpose is as vague as •'dharam", when it may be employed for purposes which are not considered charitable.

The first princi pie could not obviously be

applied to case under tbe Act, for it has not expressly or by necessa1 y implication, invoked the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth. The second principle conflicts with the express provision of cl. (4) of s. 9 of the Act: while under _the English law some purposes, though undoubtedly purposes of public utility, were not considered to be such on other considerations, under the Act such division is not p~rmissible, as cl. ( 4) of s. 9 expressly makes every such purpose charitable p"rpose. The third principle has not been consistently followed· even in England; nor can I find any reasonable basis· for the same. If that be correct principle, then no purpose, however demonstrably it may be for the general, public utility, can be

(I) (1948) rn l.T.R. Suppl. 41.

(2) (1605) IO Vos. 522, 532, 32 E.R. 947.

LaxmrJn Balwtml Bhopltllrir by Jjr. Dhananjaya R1tne\andt-o Ga4il •• <.;ho.ri:y Commi1-aiontr, Bomboy Subba Ra,,J.

Lax ·en Ball.f"Jllt Bh·prtl\tit" b, Dr. lJt.iiiaJtj ':/'A Romch, ruJ,a f)c11f1ii • Cha,;ty Commir .sioner. Bo·ttb~·

678 SUPREME OOURT REPORTS [1963J

cha.rit&ble if to implement its purpose it is neces-sary to create & climate for changing the existing law. Trusts created for educating the public on the evils of a.lcoholiam, prostit.utiun &nd other social evils, with view to put presaure ou th~ legislature to bring a.bout appropriate reforms would ce&ae to be charitable : political purpoees may be brought under thie head, for mostly, though not always, such purpoecll wou Id be sought to be effec-tuated by a. change in law. But in my view, the mere fact that change of law ie involved in the procll88 could not ma.kc a. purpose otherwise charitable non-charitable one. Nor does the fourth principle afford correct test for charitable purpose. It is true that the author's declaration that p~rticula.r gift is charitable is not decisive of the question, but in the ultimate analysis the court has to decide whether the purpose or object is charitable or not. I do not see any insurmountable difficulty in the court Qoming to conclusion one way or other whether political object ia charitable object, just like it would come to conclusion in the oaee of gift for the propaga-tion of the tenets of particular religious st:ct. No1· can it be said that the court by deciding tho charac-ter of a. trust created for political jJUrpu868 will be indulging in politics. If that be so, it can be said with equal justification that in the 0&11e of a. religious trust court by deciding the said question would be supporting a. particular religious sect ID preference to another. '.l'he court does not ta.kt side~ ID the political or religioua controversy, but only obJectiv-eJy looks a.t the purpose to aBcertaill wh..i.her 1t is charitable or not and administers 1t, 11 <:allecJ U,lJOn, through the neoeBllery machinary. Th., fifth prwoi,!Jle is sought to be applied to a. political purpostl. lt ie 11&id that the expr688 on •'po litica.i purpose" lll ao vague that there ia'the possibility of the trust being applied to non-oharita.ble purpuiWe. l do not see how it oan he posited that every politiO&l purpOiltl is

2 8.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS

vague purpose : it. depends upon the facts of the case. It is for the court to construe the trust deed in each.case with 'a view to ascertnin whether the purpose, politioal or otherwise, is vague or not. If gift for the benefit of place, <vhether parish, town, brough, county or country is charitable, as has been held in the "locality cases", 1 do not see how'a gift for the politiclil uplift of the' country would never be for charitable purpose. on the ground that it would be vague. Kor can it be said as proposition of law that. the propagation. of the principles .of ·particular political party would necessarily h•c not beneficial to the community. Sup-pose country is backward or undeveloped and philanthropist. endows property for· propagating particular doctrine likely to bring bout the welfare of the public : the ideology sought to be propagated may be labelled according to the doctrines prevalent in particular country. How can it be said as an inflexible rule of law that political purpose is not benefieial to the community ? It depends upon the facts of each case, · Tudor in his book on Charities, 5th Edn~, p. 41, points" out that "the proposition that political purposes cannot be charitable is difficult to reconcile with certain decided cases". Even some of the decisions of the English courts, finding the illogicality of such doctr.ine, attempted to modify it by stating that it is necessary, in order to establish the validity of charit,y, to show that the end is not to be attained mainly by political means, indicating thereby that the dominant pur-pose shall.not be political one. The approach of the English• Courts to this problem. has been succinctly stated by Chitty, J., in Re Foveaux (l) thus: . . . ..

"The method employed by the Court is to consider the enumeration of charities in the Statute <;f Eliza beth, bearing in mind that the enumeration is not e:xhaustive. · Institu• tione whose objects are analogous to th01e (I) (1895)2Cb·501·

laxm•n •"lwQnt BMpatku OJ Dr. Dhahr.njaya Ramachandra Gadgil •• Charity Commis· sioner, B1mba, . ' Subba Rdo J.

196t Laxman Ba/w''" BllofJr:dl:,1r b7 Dr. Oh1na'I)· .y 1 lt&nuhandra . •. .Jdgl~ Ch111ily Commia-.tioner~ B.-mna_, Su6ba Rao J.

' 680 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1963)

menti.oned 'in the Statute are admitted to be charities; and, again; institutions which are analogous to thosr, already admitted by report-ed d£>cisions are hl'ld to be charities. The pJJrsuit of thest< analogies obvio1,1sl} requires m1ution and circumspection. After all, the best 1hat'can be done is.to consider each oase as it arises, upon its ·o!VD ·special circ;um-·stan ces."

Though this statement appeared in the year 1895, scrutiny of the lat.er decisi"ons indicates that the saipe approach continued to be adopted by the courts. ··Tudor in his book dn Chivities, 5th Edn., p. 38, rl6'scribes the judicial approach to the problem thus:

"Thi.I Courts have extended the class outline(! in the preamble to the St-atute of Eli:r.a beth to such an 1>xtont aa "to render it valuel~sR as basie for the claasification of charitable ooje9ts, and it must. be admitted that no analogous counterpart. to many of the charities enumerated here can be traced in the preamble." •

To 8urnmarize : English decisions are conflicting;

thore is no common threa,~ passing through the variet.y of d!'Joision, starting from the preamble to the Rtatute of Eliza.beth, and apparent.ly relying upon the fou.rfold classification of Lord Maonagh-1~ ten, En1?lish courts from time to timf' decided cases whic}> <iould not. he sustained either on the illustra-tions in the preamhle to tpe Statute of Elizabeth or ihe analoiries drawn from them, or the classifica-tion 9f Lord Macnaghien. The decisions conflict with one another, and it. is not poBBible, or even advisahle, to sel'k to get any l?llidance from tho said deciflions to conetrue tho clear provisi ons of ''( the Indian statutes, or documert executed in Indian etatuwe, or ~ docurnent executed jn India

under circumstsnces totally. different from those obtaining in England. In India, the superstructure of democrany is sought to be built upon an illiter-ate basis. If the country had to reach political maturit.y, no facet of education would be more important than that political science.· In Trust,ees of the Tribune Press, Lahore v. Commissioner of Income-tax, Punjub ([1]) the Judicial Committee held that trust created by testator by his will to the effect that his property "in the stock and good will of the Tribune Press and News-paper in Anarkali, Lahore," should vest perma-mtntly in committee of trustees whose duty it should be "to maintain the said press and news-paper in an efficient condition, keeping up the liberal policy of the s1tid newspa.per and devoting the surplus income of the said pr<'ss and newspaper after defraying all current expenses in improving the said newspape·r and placing it on footing of permanency," was good and valid trust. It was held that the object oJ the newspaper was to supply the Province with an organ of educated public opinion, which was an object of general publip utility and accordingly the trust income was exempt from taxation under sub-s. (3) of s. 4 of the Indian Income·tax Act, 1922. The Judicial Committee took the case before .it out of the scope of . the English decisions with the following observations : "But their Lordships, having before them ' material which shows the character of the newspaper as it was in fact conducted in the ·testator's ' lifetime, have arrived at the conclusion that questions of politics and legislation were di~cussed only as many other matters were in this paper discussed, and that it is not made out that political purpose was the dominant purpose of the trust.'' (I) [19S9] L.R. 66 I.A. 241, 256,

La.tman lJnlwan' Bhopatkar bv Dr. DJ.anan;ja.J• Ramchan<ha G1.dgi, v. Charity Commis-sioner, Bombay Subba Llao J,

IHI Lc:um.11 Bal•nt 8Mto!luu ~ Dr. l>"tt<uanJa,a lf9111cJ,_.,a Gadgil •• Cllari!J C-U· 1iner, B•&.!r SubkHuJ.

On the fact~ of the case before it, the Judicial Committee came to the following conclusions :

"They think that th~ object of the paper may fairly be described as 'the object of supplying the Province with an organ of educated public oµinion' and that it should prima facie bo held to be an object of general public utility".

Subsequent remarks show the distinction between party-politics and genera.I political education :

"Having regard to the particular oircum-st.anoes of the time, the directions of the testa-tor and th.i cvidenc~ as to the contents of the paprr hofore 1898, th<iir LordshipR think that the pres<'nt case is ne&rflr on its facts to In re Soowcro/t ( [1]) than i L is to t.he case of the &mar Law Menwrial Trwtt ('), or to the case put by Ru>sell, J., in In re 'J'etJ,ey (') of newspaper sabsidized for the promotion of particular political or fiscal opinions."

This judgment was clear attompt to sustain th<>

validity of the trust, thou~h constituted to educate the public opinion involving also the propllga.tion of political views, having regard to thP. wide defini-tion of charitable purpose under the Indian Act. In AU India Spinners' Association of Mirzapur, Ahmmabad v. Commissioner of Income·t,ax, Bombay('), the All India Congr1'Bll Committee by it1 resolution started an association for the purpose of development of hand-spinnin!( by the· use of hand· looms. The associe.tion was run on 11. co-opere.tive baeis, that is, the surplus income wae distributed only among the members : the Privy Council held that though the <M1Bociation was started by politi· cal party, the purpose of the association was

12) (I ~3 ) '7 Tax Cas. 51'8. (4) (194~) L.JI. 711.A. IS9

(I) ( 1898) 2 Cb. 638.

(3) (1~23) I Ch. 258.

2 S.C.R.

charitable one within the meanin£!' of the Income-tax Act. Lord Wright says : --

"The statement of the object excludes, in their Lordship's opinion, any question ·of profit making, and also excludes any element of party politics." .

'!'hen adverting to the very wide words sub-s. (3l(i) of s. 4 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, namely, " other purposes of general public ut.ility , " t.he ,Judicial Committee proceeded to observe:

" These last aru very wide words. Their

exaot scope may requfre on other occasions very careful considerations ......... Though the connection in one· sense of the Association with Congress was relied on as not consistent with 'general public utility ' because it might be for the advancement primarily of parti· cular party, it is sufficiently clear in this ca.se tha.t the Assooia.tion's purpose were indepen-dent of, a.nd were not affected by, the purposes of propa.ga.nda of Congress. "

Referring to the English · decisions, the Judicia.l Committee observe~:

" The English cases there (Tribune Press

Case (')) cited do not turn on the words 'gen-eral public utility,' but they illustrate ·how courts of first instance in England have actua.Jly dealt with the particula.r questions there submitted to them."

This decision lays down two principles, na.mely,(l) the words " othflr purposes of general public utility" are very wide . and the English decisions do not turn upon those words; and (2) even on the assum-ption that the said decisions a.pplied, trust does not ctue to lr oe fr.1 €tllerel puhlicutility, though it (I) (H39) L.R. ~.I. A.241,256.

IHI

loxma,. Ba/want Bhofia,kar by D1-. DJ,ananfaya Ramchandra Gaa,;t chori(;C...,,;,. sion11, omNy --' Su6ba Rao J,

i19GZ may be for the advancement primarily of parti-I.t"'"'"" Balwant. cular party, if the .purposes were independent of,and Bhop••~•r by. were not effected by, the purposes or propaganda . R1;;,;,f.":,;;:•{;~gil of that party. This case, while not deciding on . •. the wide import of the Indian statute, made dis-Charity Cammi•-_ tinction between party's pwpaganda and its "°""'• Bomb>y ' party politics and its other obji:cts. In Su bash Subb• Rao J. Chandra Bose v. Gordhandas .Patel (l) testator ~---- - -- . made four gifts by his will and. provided that •'the ' balance of my assets_ after disposal of the above mentioned four gifts is to be handed over to JI.Ir. Subhas Chandra Bose to be spent by him or by his nominee or nominees according to his instruc-tions for- the political uplift of India and preferably for publicity work on behalf of -India's cause in other countries." The Bombay High Conrt held -that the words "political uplift of India" whether it denotes general raising of the political status or conditions of India or the advancement of political purpose was too vague to be capable of enforcement by the Courts and accordingly the trnst was bad and an intestacy resulted as to the residue covered by the clause. The decision, therefore, was bas~d upon the principle that charitable purpose could not be sustained when it . was vague. But the observations_ of Beaumont,· C.J., are instructive, and they are:

" However, there . the cases are, and if we-had in this case gift to India, or gift to the people of India, we would have to consider whether the principle of those cases should be applied in India, and if so whether that principle which has been gradually extended from parish to country , should now be .extended to sub-continent."

further observations of the learned Chief ' ( 11 I.LR. IMO llom. 254. Zill.

The

2 s.c.R.

BUPREME COURT REPORTS

Justice at p. decision:

279 indicate the · reasons for the

" What we have got here is gift for the politioal uplift of India, and ono cannot possi· bly disrtJgard the adjective •political'. Assum-ing that the meaning of those words is that for which Mr. Bo~e contends, . i. e., that they denote improvement in the political system of India, and therefore to that extent must be beneficial to India, the diffculty is that the words are too vague ............... The test must ultimately be whether, if the Court be called upon to administer the trust; the Court would be able to do so. Here, it seems to me im-possible for the Court to determine what is embraced in the term political uplift of India." Citing· the obseravations of. Lord Parker, the learned Chief Justice observed at. p.281:

"A trust to advance political purpose i~ clealy bad on the ground given by Lord Parkar in Bowman v. Se<Ylilar Society Limi· ted ( 1 j, that trust for the attainment of political objects is invalid,· not because it is illegal, but because the Court has no means of judging whether any proposed political change will or will not be for the public wel· fare or benefit."

'.I.'he learned Chief Justice, therefore, might have held that the trust was charitable if he had not come to the conclusion that the purpose of "politi· cal . uplift" was vague and court was not in position to know whether particular political object would be or would not be for the public welfare or benefit. division .Bench of the Bom· bay High Court in re Lokamanya Tilak J'Ubtke National Trnst Ftind, Bombay ([1]) had to consider similar question under the Income-tax Act, 1922 •. (I) (1917 )A.c. 406. (2) (1941) 43 l!om. UL 11127.

Subba RooJ.

Le.\'7'91111 B•ltoGnl B•-'k"' b.1 Dr. fJ/ta'lfOnja,,o Rflmdl01Sdra Gadtrl v. C/loril' Onnnis-riontr, Bfllflboy

SuJbo R .. J.

686 SUPREME OOWRT REPORTS (1963)

There, trust was created for the following objects: (I) the advancement of a.ny purpose which might in thf' uncontrollod opinion of the managing com-mittee bC' natinna.I or of national importance for the inhabitants of British India., (2) the political adva.ncPmcnt of India. having for its goal the acqui-sition of complete na.tiona.1 autonomy or "swara-jya", (3) the diffusion of political education and know ledge RR to the political affairs of ·India. and propagandist work both in India as well as iD any part of th!' world, and (4) any object which might oonduoo to any of the aforesaid object. The Court held that the first mentioned object went bPyond the definition of "charitable purp<'S~s" contained in s. 4 of the Incom~tax Act in as much ns the sec-tion of tht· purpose rested in the uncontrolled opinion of the managing committ<>e, and that the second meuti<mcd object. a.lso went too far, because it was rC'a.lly gift for political purposes. Beaumont C.J., who ck livered the lt·ading judgmC'nt, noticed that the purpose, namely, the advancement of any other (lbject of f:(enera.1 public utility went further than the definition of charity to be derived from the English eases. He observed that, if a.II the pur-poses in the trust deed roulrl be regarded RB of general public utility for the benefit of th!' inha-bitants of English India, then the trust "\l"ould be, in bis opinion, good cna.ritable trust. Bot he could uot decide that it was eo, hecPuse, in his opinion, if the attainment of national autonomy might be regarded as national purpoee accepted 11enerally by, and for the good of, the in?abit&nts of British India, there was very keen divergence of npinion &B to the methodR by which that natio-nal autonomy should be attained and, therefore, the gift was for political purpos!s. Kania, J., who deli-vered a. separate but concurring jodgm~nt, came to the C'onclusion that the Hecond mentioned objfctwas pre-~miLt ntly political pnlJlCH' aIJd f1 II witbip

iUPREME COURT REPORTS

2 S.C.R.

the rule stated in the Tribune's• case ([1]}. If I may say so, with respect, the decision ·of the learned Judires was unconsciously coloured by the English decisions.based on party politics and those deci-sions had been wrongly applied to case of natio· nal uplift of the country which was struggling for independence. '

The t~ust now in qnestion came under the .

judicial scrutiny of the Bombay High Court in connection with. the Income-tax Act, 1922. The trustees there then contended that the trust was for charitable purpose and was, therefore, not subject to the provisions of the In0ome-tax Act. The High Court held that cl: (I) of the trust deed could not be construed as constituting charitable purpose, as the purposes mentioned in the said clause were too vague and wide to constitute chari-table purposes within the meaning of the Income tax Act· Beaumont, C.J·, who delivered the judgment of the Bench, observed:

"The purpose include organising public movements, and even if you limit those general words by the words 'calculated to promote of national ideal', ·it seems to me i~possible to say th!'t. the l?romotion of pub-lic movements calculated m the view of the trustees to pwmote the national ideal can be regarded a~_ necessarily of public utility."

The learned Chief Justice went on to observe:

" It seems to me clear that under clause I of this trust-deed the wh<Jle of the 'Profits of the newspapers co~ld be app!i~d for any one of the various obJects spe01f1ed and, there-fore, if any of those objects do not fall within "the dtlfinition of charitable object, then the clau&e ?abnot he, regarded as constituting

(I) (1939) L.R. 66, I.A. ~41, 256.

£a•man Bal11JSnJ /Jholatkar b-, Dr. Dh-•Ja.Jf' _.,.,,.,GadgiJ •• Charity Cammi•· 11·ont.f', Bombay Sub6a RaoJ.

Lo..,,.a11 BalrvtntJ Bl~ ttcu ~' hr. Vltananja,Ja P.ate/tartdra •. Q.,tl11l Claaril1 C:O.mis-,._;,, &111~1 Srll><I Rao J.

SUPREME OOURT REPORTS ll963J

charitable trast, and, as I have said, in my view, some of the objoots of the trust certainly go beyond the definition of charitable trust."

The reason. of the deciaion, therefore, wa.e that some of the objects of the trust were charitable and others were not, and a.s the whole of the profits of the newspapers could be applied for non-charitable purpose, the trust was not valid. The High Court then did not decide whether the first purpose in the trust deed was charitable or not: that question falls to be decide in the present cue.

It i8 therefore, clear that the Indian decillions, though to some extent coloured by the English decisions, appreciated the distinction be\ween the wide language, of sub·&. (3) of a. 4 of the Indian Income-tax Act and the fourth category of Lord Maonaghten's cl1188ification under the EngliAh law of charities. But I find it difficult to accept the observations ma.de in the said judgments that trust created for the advancement of political obje-cts would neoell8&rily cease to be one for public charitable purpose. In aupport of this propo~ition there is nothing except the doubtful and conflict· ing authority in England. There is no justification to curtail the wide words of the statute by impor-ting foreign ideas developed in different set up. In this context, decision of the Supreme Court of one of the Sta.tee in America is rather instructive, viz., that in Taylor v. Hoag('). There, trust created to promote improvements in the structure and methods of government was held to he charitable tl'118t, although the purpose was to eectfre radical changes in the "present" system. Frazer, J., answers, in my view eff'ect.ively, all the objections raised by the English Courts in holding that trust for political purpose was Toid. Adverting to the question that thii trust. iu (I) (1!122)21 A.L R. 946, 9'9, 9l0.

that case involved change in the emting law, the learned Judge observed:

"Must it be held void because the succe-ssful attainment of . these objects would invo-lve . change in existing laws. We would hesitate to subscribe to such doctrine, unless reason or authority compelled us to do so."

The learned Judge proceeded to state:

" To hold that an endeavour to procure by proper means, change in law, is, in effect, to attempt to violate that law, would discourage improvement in legislation and tend to compel us to continue indefinitely to live under laws designed for an entirely different state of society. Such. view is . oppo-sed to every principle of our Government, based on the·theory that it is Government •of the people, by the people, and for the people,' and foils to recognize the right of those who make the laws to change them at their pleasure, when circumstances may seem to require. With the wisdom of the proposed change the courts are not concerned. We perform our duty in determining whether or • not the method adopted to make the change violates established law. In the present oase we find no apparent intent to.violate any law. On the contrary, the trust specifioalJy requires its objects to be accomplished by 'lawful means.' ,,. .. ,

Now, let me consider sJme of the' provisions of the Act which are in direct conflict with some of the tests laid down by the English decisions to ascertain whether purpose is charitable or not. The first is s. 9(4) which ~ays that chartiable purpose included the advancement of any other object of general public utility. I have alread;y pointed Ollt

l0%man Balwanl B4of>alkar by IH. Dhmtrmffega 1/--· •• Gadr/il CAarit1 Commir sionn. Bomba, Sublia Rao J.

1962 -Luean Br.Uaonl B~J!L-ar bJ Dr. DAananja_10 ll~AGIJlira a'gii •• cw;,, Oomnti•-.._., Bomb-, SMoRaoJ.

the wido amplitude of the30 words. Section 11 11ays:

" public trust created for purposes somu of whi(lh are charitable or roligioue and some are not shall not be deemed to be void in respect to the charitable or religious pur-pose, only on the ground that it ii! void with respect to the non-charitable or non-religious purpose."

Whil" in England if trust was created for a· chari-table or non-chartiable purpose, the entire trnst would he void, 88 the trustees C'ould administer the trust exclusively for the benefit of non-charitable purposes, under s. 11 of the Act th~ law i• changed in regard to that matter. Section 55 introduces oypres doctrine which is wider in scopo than the doctrine is generally understodd in that it enables the court, imer alia, under certain circumstauoeR, if it is not in publio interest, expedient, pra.otioable, desirable, neces88.ry or rroper to carry out wholly or partially the origina intention of the author of the pu blio trust or the object for which the public trust wBB created, to apply the same to any other object. The Aot widens the scope of rharitable purpose as understood in the English la.w, recognizes the va.lidity of the trust though the purposes inclu-de both charitable and nou-cha.ritable, a.ad enables the court, under certain ciroumstan.ies, to divert the trust to other charitable purposes not intended by tho author of the trust. The liberal spirit ado-pted by the Act does not permit a. narrow interpre-tation of a. ch>iritable purpose accepted by the English courts under different circumstances.

Let me now summarize my viewe on the

eubjeot: (I) The Englieh deoieionR a.re based upon pragmatic approach to the probleme that arOBe before them, having regard to the historioal deve-lopment of the law of obaritiee in that oountrr,

SUPREME COURT REPOHTS

2 S.C.R.

there is no common thread discernible in the large volume of English decisions. (2) Under the Act, unlike in England, the advancement of the object of common public.utility is declared to be chari-table purpose, a.nd it }s not permissible to curtail its scope with reference to English decisions. (3)The expression " object of general public utility " i9 very comprehensive and it includes every purpose, whether political or otherwise, provided it is an object of general public utility.

The English decisions, theref~re, afford no help to construe s. 9 of the Act to ascertain whether purpose is charitable or not under the Indian law. For the reasons I have given, I hold, without any hesitation that the purpose of the trust in tl1e present case is charitable purpose within the meaning of s. 9 of the Act ..

Even on that basis it is contended that trust giving power to trustee to spend the trust funds on charitable arid non-charitable objects is void and as the High Court held that the second object of the trust was non- charitable the entire trust must fail. . This argument ignores the distinction between trust deed empowering trustee to spend on charitable object or non-charitable object and trust. deed empowering him to spend on charitable object and non-charitable object. In Halsbury's Laws of England, 3rd Edn., Vol.4, at p.272, the following passage appears:

" When testator give funds to be app-

lied partly for objects which are charitable and partly for objects which either are not charitable or fail, but . does not specify the proportions in which the funds are to be app-lied for the different objeuts, the Court will make an apportionment." .

" Again, where fund is given for several objects, some ch'l,ritable and some non·chari· table or illegal, there being clear intention

JgfJ

laXlftM Bolwa1d Bhopalka• by Dr. DAa."anjcs;a Ramadlanlra Gad1U•

Chari'J Ccmnsia-aiOt11r, Bomb11,

to devote some part to the charitable objects, if it can be aeoertained what are the proper proportions to be attributed to the several o"jecte, the Court direct,;; a.n i11quiry, but if fr.om the nature of t.hc gift it appears impra-cticable to fix thu proportions, the Court divides the fund equally between the differ-ent objects."

This passage is supported by decisi<·ns relied upon by the author. It is not neceSBary to discues them in detail, as the learned counsel for the appellant has not questioned the correctness of tbe said proposition. In this view, it is not necessary to consider whether s. 11 of the Act has retro3pective opera.tioo. Learned counsel for the appellant att-empted to argue that s. 55 of the Act offends his righL of revflrsion to the property which is the subjeotrma.tter of the trust. The question of the validity of the said section does not a.rise in the present case. The only que~tion is whether it is the duty of the trustees of the trust to make a.n appli-oa.tion for registration of the said trust. As I have held that. the trust is public trust within the meaning of s. 9 of the Act, under s. 18 thereof, the aaid trust has to be registered in manner prescribed therein. Questions such a.s the extent of the trust, the scope of the doctrine of cypres, a.re a.II foreign to the present inquiry. I do not propo-se to express any opinion on the sa.m<i.

In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed

with costs.

BY CoURT: In view of the majority opinion of ihe Court the a. ppeal is allowed and th•' Order of the Aseista.nt Charity Com mi8"ioner directing the Trust to be registered confirmed by the Charity Commissioner cm appeal is set. a.side. The appel-lants will be entitled to their costs in all the Courts.

Appeal aJlowed.