no one can take advantage of his own wrong

 

It is relevant in this context to quote the maxim "nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria meaning no man can take advantage of his own wrong." Union Of India & Ors vs Major General Madan Lal Yadav : 1996 (1) KLT Online 901 (SC) was a case in which an action was taken against the respondent under Section 122 of the Army Act, 1950  on account of dereliction of duty and action. Relevant paragraph reads as follows:

 

"................. On consideration of the charge, the proceedings were adjourned from day to day till the respondent appeared on March 2, 1987. It is obvious that the respondent had avoided trial to see that the trial would not get commenced. Under the scheme of the Act and the Rules, presence of the accused is a pre-condition for commencement of trial. In his absence and until his presence was secured, it became difficult, may impossible, to proceed with the trial of the respondent- accused. In this behalf, the maxim nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria- meaning no man can take advantage of his own wrong - squarely stands in the way of avoidance by the respondent and he is estopped to plead bar of limitation contained in Section 123. In Broom's Legal Maximum [10th Edn.] at page 191 it is stated "it is a maxim of law, recognized and established, that no man shall take advantage of his own wrong; and this maxim, which is based on elementary principles, is fully recognized in Courts of law and of equity, and, indeed, admits of illustration from every branch of legal procedure. The reasonableness of the rule being manifest, we proceed at once to show its application by reference to decided cases. It was noted therein that a man  shall not take advantage of his own wrong to gain the favourable interpretation of the law. In support thereof, the author has placed reliance on another maxim frustra legis auxilium quoerit qui in legem committit. He relies on Perry v. Fitzhowe [8 Q.B. 757]. At page 192, it is stated that if a man be bound to appear on a certain day, and before that day the obligee put him in prison, the bond is void. At page 193, it is stated that "it is moreover a sound principle that he who prevents a thing from being done shall not avail himself of the non-performance he has occasioned". At page 195, it is further stated that "a wrong doer ought not to be permitted to make a profit out of his own wrong". At page 199 it is observed that "the rule applies to the extent of undoing the advantage gained where that can be done and not to the extent of taking away a right previously possessed".

 

In Devendra Kumar vs State Of Uttaranchal & Ors : 2013 (3) KLT (Suppl) 62 (SC) : (2013) 9 SCC 363 : AIR 2013 SC 3325 the applicability of the maxim has again come up. In paragraph 23 of the said judgment it has been held that a person having done wrong cannot take advantage of his own wrong and plead bar of any law to frustrate the lawful trial by a competent court. In such a case, the legal maxim 'Nullus Commodum  Capere Potest De Injuria Sua Propria' applies. The persons violating the law cannot be permitted to urge that their offence cannot be subjected to inquiry, trial or investigation. Paragraph 23 of the said judgment is relevant in this context which is extracted below:

 

 

" .................... A person having done wrong cannot take advantage of his own wrong and plead bar of any law to frustrate the lawful trial by a competent Court. In such a case the legal maxim Nullus Commodum Capere Potest De Injuria Sua Propria applies. The persons violating the law cannot be permitted to urge that their offence cannot be subjected to inquiry, trial or investigation. (Vide: Union of India v. Maj. Gen. Madan Lal Yadav, AIR 1996 SC 1340; and Lily Thomas v. Union of India & Ors., AIR 2000 SC 1650 nor can a person claim any right arising out of his own writing.