2 hrs ago
Do Affidavits Still Serve Citizens, or Add Costly Journeys?
Preeti Kumari says people are often asked to get affidavits for government services.
An affidavit is a statement someone swears is true.
She argues that the person who witnesses the oath may not check whether the details are actually true.
Getting the paper can cost money and take a whole day, especially for people who live far from an office.
She says officials can still check important facts and punish people who deliberately lie without requiring an oath every time.
In court, people could still be questioned and their statements challenged.
Kumari suggests using identity-checked declarations that carry legal responsibility instead.
She points to examples from the United States and Ireland.
Her main question is whether the oath adds enough value to justify the burden.
Preeti Kumari questions why routine government applications must require sworn affidavits.
She argues that affidavits often do not verify the facts stated in them.
Getting an affidavit can require travel, fees, stamp paper and lost work, especially in smaller towns and remote areas.
Kumari says legal proceedings should retain tools such as challenges, cross-examination and penalties for deliberate lies.
She proposes authenticated self-declarations with legal consequences, citing reforms in the United States and Ireland.
- Who
- Preeti Kumari, district commissioner of West Karbi Anglong, Assam, argues for affidavit reform.
- What
- She proposes replacing routine sworn affidavits with authenticated self-declarations carrying legal consequences for deliberate falsehood.
- Where
- India, with examples from the United States and Ireland.
- When
- The article discusses the issue nearly two centuries after the Act XIV of 1848.
- Why
- Kumari says affidavit requirements can impose costs and travel burdens without necessarily verifying the statements.
Reform affidavits
Retain safeguards in proceedings
Routine administrative requirements
Reform affidavits
Kumari argues that authenticated self-declarations can establish identity and legal responsibility without the cost and travel involved in swearing an affidavit.
Retain safeguards in proceedings
The article notes that affidavits remain routinely required for matters such as caste, income, residence and eligibility for benefits; it does not present a specific defense of retaining them in every case.
Statements in legal proceedings
Reform affidavits
Kumari says a statement need not be sworn for it to be challenged, tested against records or followed by cross-examination and penalties for deliberate lies.
Retain safeguards in proceedings
She acknowledges that some inconvenience is unavoidable in administering justice and argues that procedures should be retained when they serve a clear purpose.
Key facts
- Author
- Preeti Kumari
- Position stated
- District commissioner, West Karbi Anglong, Assam
- Historical law cited
- Act XIV of 1848 empowered the Supreme Court at Fort William to commission people to take affidavits and solemn affirmations.
- U.S. example
- 28 U.S.C. 1746 permits unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury.
- Ireland example
- The Civil Law and Criminal Law Act 2020 introduced electronically signed self-declarations called statements of truth in covered proceedings.
- Suggested approach
- Use authenticated self-declarations with legal consequences for deliberate falsehood, while preserving ways to challenge statements.









