

In the concept of person and legal personality under juriprudence, object of law is to regulate the relationship between individuals and society. The validity of the acts and omissions of persons is determined on the basis of their reasonableness. All those acts which hamper the rights and interest of others are called unlawful and all those which don’t adversely effect the interest of others are held to be lawful.
The word person is derived from the Latin word persona which meant a mask worn by actors playing different roles in a drama. But in later staged this word used in the sense of a living being capable of having rights and duties.
A person is generally defined as being a subject or bearer of a right and duties.
Person also include groups of persons or of property which also capable of being subjects of rights and duties because state conferred artificial personality to them.
The artificial personality has been created for the purpose of bestowing the character and properties of individuality on a collective body of persons. In simpler words fiction of law is something false which law assumes or accepts as true .
For example : A company or a corporation or an idol though not a natural person is treated as legal person by fiction of law with a view to determined their rights , claims , duties , obligations and liabilities etc.
Any being to whom law regards as capable of rights and duties . Any being that is so capable , is a person whether human being or not and nothing that is not so capable is a person even though he be a man.
Person as entity to which rights and duties may be attributed.
In nutshell , A juristic person is not a human being , it may be any other subject matter either a thing or a mass of property or group of human beings to which law attributes personality.
There are the persons who do not enjoy the status of legal personality but the society has some duty towards them. Which are as follows :

The law attributes legal personality to unborn children . A child in mother’s womb is by fiction treated as already born and regarded as person for many purposes. Such as
According to Salmond , the personality of human being commence with the birth and ceases with his death . Therefore dead man are no longer persons in the eyes of the law because nor they have any rights nor they have any interest or duties. Dead man corpse is not a property in the eyes of law.
However Salmond points out three things in respect of which anxieties of living men extend beyond the period of their death , of which law will take notice . They are
Ashray Adhikar Abhiyan vs Union of India 2002 supreme court has held that even a
homeless person when found dead on the road has a right of a decent burial or cremation a per his religious faith.Testamentary dispositions of the dead are carried out by law.
Law does not recognize beats or lower animals as persons because they are merely things and have no natural or legal right . Salomond regards them as mere objeVts of legal rights and duties , but never the subjects of them .
It has been judicially recognised that idol is a juristic person and as such it can hold property . It’s position is , however like that of minor because the priest that us Pujari acts as a guardian to look after the interest if the idol i.e. deity.
In the case of Yogendra Nath Naskar vs Commissioner of Income Tax , it was held by the supreme court that idol is juristic person capable of holding property and of being taxes through its shebatis who is entrusted with the possession and management of its property. An idol cam be treated as a unit of assessment for assessing it’s liability under Income Tax Act.
The supreme court in Devkinandan vs Muralidharan rules that the property of Hindu temple or idol vests in idol itself while it’s possession and management vests in Shebait as manager of the estate.
However the Supreme Court in Krishna Singh vs Mathura distinguished the legal position of a Math from that of temple and held that Math is a religious institution sue generis unlike a temple where presiding element is deity , whereas the presiding element of Math is it’s Mahant or Mathadhipati. The property belonging to Math is ,in fact attached to office of Mahant and passes by inheritance to one who fills the office.
As regards the legal personality of a mosque , the court have expressed conflicting views. High Court of Lahore in Maula Bux vs Hafijuddin held that mosque was a juristic person capable of being sued. But the privy Council held a contrary view in Masjid Shahid Ganj case and observed that mosques are not artificial persons in eyes of laws and therefore, no suit can be brought by or against them.
The supreme Court in Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committe vs Somnath Das has rules that the Guru Granth Sahib ,the holy Granth of Sikhs is a legal person.
Two kinds of persons
© VIDHOON All Rights Reserved