Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas

Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas

Literal Meaning

Happy is he who has been able to understand the causes of things.

Explanation & Origin

Origin– Felix qui potuit rerum cognosecree causas literally means a person who understands the casued of things is happy. But it can have different meaning

Explanation– Causes of things is very vague concept, if you see causes can mean that the person caused a thing, it may be good but in law it seen has action of crime has been done and the person is supposed to be punishment. Also we can say that person who understands a thing about law is happy.

Illustration

AB enters into contract but CD try to leech their money but AB knowing the law and causes of things, is happy because he knows laws.

Case Reference

In the case of  Motipur Zamindari Co. Ltd vs The State Of Bihar And [1] In case of winding up the liquidator will have to pursue the remedy provided by this Act. He or the company will be in no worse position than the official assignee or official receiver of an individual proprietor who may happen to become insolvent in another State. Finally, Mr. P. R. Das strongly relies on section 41 of the Act and contends that that section would be wholly inapplicable to a company and that circumstance by itself would indicate that the Bihar Legislature did not intend that a company owning an estate should be governed by this Act. A corporation, it is true, cannot be made liable for treason, felony or any misdemeanour involving personal violence or for any offence for which the only penalty is. Imprisonment or corporal punishment. (Halsbury, 2nd Edition, Volume IX, article 5, p. 14). Section 41 does not prescribe punishment by imprisonment only. Mr. P. R. Das suggests that the infliction of imprisonment or fine would depend upon the gravity of the offence and not on the character of the offender. This argument, however, would seem to run counter to the opinion of Lord Blackburn set forth at pages 869-870 of the report of the very case relied on by Mr. P. R. Das. The recent cases it seems to indicate that a corporation may be convicted even of an offence requiring an act of will or a state of mind. Apart, however, from the consideration whether a company may be held guilty of wilful failure or neglect, as to which we need not express any definite opinion on this occasion, there can be no difficulty in applying the provisions of section 41 to the officers or agents of the company. On a notification under section 3(1) being published the estate vests in the State. 

In the case of Mir Hasan Khan And Ors. vs The State[2] it was observed that Possibly, in modifying the section as it stood in the bill, the Legislative Council had in mind the case of Lord George Gordon (21 State Trials 486). Lord George Gordon put, himself at the head of a large mob which proceeded to the Houses of Parliament in order to protest against the enactment of certain legislation. After having made its protest, the mob dispersed, but certain members of it proceeded to perpetrate outrages in different parts of the city of London. Lord George Gordon was tried on a charge of a high treason, & was acquitted, the reason apparently being that, while he had intended to make a demonstration outside the Houses of Parliament, he had not been a party to the disorders which resulted from it. Section 121 A, occurs in a chapter of the Penal Code which is headed “offences against the State ” whereas the offence of conspiracy is contained in the preceding chapter, chap. VA. which is headed “criminal conspiracy.” The Legislature in enacting Section 121A clearly had in mind the English Treason Felony Act of 1848 & I am very much inclined to think that, in enacting it, it did not aim at conspiracies other than conspiracies which had a political object, that is, conspiracies to overthrow the existing constitution or conspiracies to prevent the enactment of legislation which was considered to be obnoxious or to compel the resignation of a member or members of the Govt. who had become unpopular. As the section stands, however, I am not prepared to say that in certain circumstances persons who organise a strike among police men or certain other public or Municipal employees might not render themselves liable to prosecution under it. Certain persons were convicted of treason-felony on the ground that they had entered into a conspiracy to cause explosions with dynamite in different parts of the United Kingdom, their object being to compel the British Govt. to make alterations in the Govt. of Ireland. I refer to these decisions because, as will appear presently, the object of the promoters of this conspiracy, assuming that they intended to use criminal force or to make a show of criminal force, was not to bring that force directly to bear on the members of the Cabinet at the seat of the Provincial Govt., but to bring it to bear on them indirectly at a number of points in the province.

In the case of The Registrar, University Of … vs Union Of India[3] it was observed that Law is a deep science. It is by a process of great experience, judicial experience is evolved. It is not acquired overnight. If that were not so, any one without qualification could occupy that exalted position. In this connection, it is worthwhile to quote the remarks of Lord Coke who, addressing James I, stated as follows:The King in his own person cannot adjudge any case, either criminal or treason, felony, etc. of betwixt party and party, concerning his inheritance, chattels or goods, etc., but this ought to be determined and adjudged in some Court of justice according to Law and custom of England. God had endowed His Majesty with excellent science and great endowments of nature, but His Majesty was not learned in the laws of his realm of England, and causes which concern the life, or inheritance, or goods or fortunes of his subjects, are not to be decided by natural reason, but by artificial reason and judgment of law, which law is an art which requires long study and experience, before that a man can attain to the cognizance of it.

Edited by Vigneshwar Ramasubramania

Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje

Reference

[1] 1953 AIR 320, 1953 SCR 720

[2] AIR 1951 Pat 60

[3] (1995) 2 MLJ 367

Team @Law Times Journal
Hello. We are team members of Law Times Journal. Editorial members at Law Times Journal is a team of writers led by Vedanta Yadav. Want to become a writer at Law Times Journal? Send your current work/resume with title "Resume-Editor" at vedantayadav@lawtimesjournal.in