This article is an ethnographic exploration of a promiscuously present and instantly recognisable legal and cultural artefact in India, the stamp paper document under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The ‘stamp paper’ is a documentary form that is constantly escaping from its legal moorings in revenue and evidentiary law, and is being replicated, mimed and recommissioned, both in form and in substance, and in ways which blur the domains of the legal, the quasi-legal and the non-legal. Its bureaucratic authority is produced through protocols and rituals of writing, verification, identification, attestation and authorisation performed by paper workers such as court typists, stamp vendors, notaries and oath commissioners. Yet the stamp paper is simultaneously viewed as notoriously fraudulent and legally invalid—its use redundant and truth functionaries infamously corruptible. Focusing on the materiality of the stamp paper, as it circulates through the interstitial spaces of Patiala House Court Complex in New Delhi, this article seeks to address this curious paradox and provides an account of the social life of law through the travels of an emblematic yet dubious legal form.
AnjariaJ. S.2011. ‘Ordinary States: Everyday Corruption and the Politics of Space in Mumbai.’ American Ethnologist38 (1): 58–72.
3.
AppaduraiArjun, ed. 1986. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
BatraLalit. 2009. ‘A Review of Urbanisation and Urban Policy in Post-Independent India.’ Working Paper Series CSLG/WP/12. New Delhi: Centre for the Study of Law and Governance, Jawaharlal Nehru University.
5.
BaxiPratiksha. 2014. Public Secrets of Law: Rape Trials in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
6.
BubandtN.2009. ‘From the Enemy’s Point of View: Violence, Empathy, and the Ethnography of Fakes.’ Cultural Anthropology24 (3): 553–88.
7.
BearL.2001. ‘Public Genealogies: Documents, Bodies and Nations in Anglo-Indian Railway Family Histories.’ Contributions to Indian Sociology35 (3): 355–88.
8.
CodyFrancis. 2009. ‘Inscribing Subjects to Citizenship: Petitions, Literacy Activism, and the Performativity of Signature in Rural Tamil India.’ Cultural Anthropology24 (3): 347–80.
9.
DasVeena. 2007. Life and Words: Violence and the Descent into the Ordinary. Berekely: University of California Press.
10.
DasVeenaPooleDeborah. 2004. ‘Anthropology in the Margins: Comparative Ethnographies.’ In Anthropology in the Margins of the State, edited by DasVeenaPooleDeborah, 3–33. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
11.
DerridaJ.2001. Writing and Difference. Translated by BassAlan. London: Routledge.
12.
DerridaJ.2005. Paper Machine. Translated by BowlbyR.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
13.
DeryDavid. 1998. ‘“Papereality” and Learning in Bureaucratic Organizations.’ Administration & Society29 (6): 677–89.
14.
DuschinskiHaley. 2009. ‘Destiny Effects: Militarization, State Power, and Punitive Containment in Kashmir Valley.’ Anthropological Quarterly82 (3): 691–717.
15.
EckertJulia. 2006. ‘From Subjects to Citizens: Legalism from Below and the Homogenisation of the Legal Sphere.’ The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law38 (53–54): 45–75.
16.
FeldmanI.2008. ‘Refusing Invisibility: Documentation and Memorialization in Palestinian Refugee Claims.’ Journal of Refugee Studies21(4): 498–516.
17.
GoodrichPeter. 2002. Law in the Courts of Love: Literature and Other Minor Jurisprudences. London: Routledge.
18.
GoodrichPeter2011. ‘Specters of Law: Why the History of the Legal Spectable Has Not Been Written.’ UC Irvine Law Review1 (3): 773–812.
19.
GordilloG.2006. ‘The Crucible of Citizenship: Id-Paper Fetishism in the Argentinean Chaco.’ American Ethnologist33 (2): 162–76.
20.
GuptaAkhil. 2012. Red Tape: Bureaucracy, Structural Violence, and Poverty in India. Durham: Duke University Press.
21.
HansenThomas Blom. 2009. ‘Sovereigns Beyond the State: On Legality and Authority in Urban India.’ In Sovereign Bodies: Citizens, Migrants, and States in the Postcolonial World, edited by HansenThomas BlomStepputatFinn, 169–91. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
HetheringtonK.2009. ‘Privatizing the Private in Rural Paraguay: Precarious Lots and the Materiality of Rights. American Ethnologist36 (2): 224–41.
23.
HoldenLivia. 2004. ‘Official Policies for (Un)Official Customs: The Hegemonic Treatment of Hindu Divorce Customs by Dominant Legal Discourses.’ The Journal of Legal Pluralism and Unofficial Law36 (49): 47–74.
24.
HoldenLivia2008. Hindu Divorce: A Legal Anthropology. Aldershot: Ashgate.
25.
HullMatthew S.2012a. ‘Documents and Bureaucracy.’ Annual Review of Anthropology41 (1): 251–67.
26.
HullMatthew S.2012b. Government of Paper: The Materiality of Bureaucracy in Urban Pakistan. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27.
KeaneWebb. 1997. Signs of Recognition: Powers and Hazards of Representation in an Indonesian Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
28.
KellyT.2006. ‘Documented Lives: Fear and the Uncertainties of Law during the Second Palestinian Intifada.’ Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute12 (1): 89–107.
29.
KosterM.2014. ‘Fear and Intimacy: Citizenship in a Recife slum, Brazil.’ Ethnos79 (2): 215–37.
30.
KozinA.V.2007. ‘The Legal File.’ International Journal for the Semiotics of Law20 (2): 91–216.
31.
LatourBruno. 2010. The Making of Law: An Ethnography of the Conseil D’Etat. Cambridge: Polity.
32.
Law Commission of India. 1977. Sixty Seventh Report on The Indian Stamp Act, 1899. New Delhi: Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, Government of India.
33.
MalikAditya. 2010. ‘In the Divine Court of Appeals: Vows before the God of Justice.’ In Hinduism and Law: An Introduction, edited by LubinTimothyDavisDonald R.Jr.KrishnanJayanth K., 207–14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
MathurO. P.1996. Economic Reform and the Stamp Act. New Delhi: National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
35.
MathurO. P.1998. The Indian Stamp Act, 1899. New Delhi: National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
36.
MathurNayanika. 2016. Paper Tiger: Law, Bureaucracy and the Developmental State in Himalayan India. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press.
37.
MazzarellaWilliam. 2006. ‘Internet X-ray: E-governance, Transparency, and the Politics of Immediation in India.’ Public Culture18 (3): 473–505.
38.
MessickBrinkley Morris. 1993. The Calligraphic State: Textual Domination and History in a Muslim Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
39.
MitchellTimothy. 2002. Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-politics, Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
40.
ModyPerveez. 2008. The Intimate State: Love-Marriage and the Law in Delhi. New Delhi: Routledge.
41.
MongiaRadhika. 1999. ‘Race, Nationality, Mobility: A History of the Passport.’ Public Culture11 (3): 527–55.
42.
MorrisonCharles. 1972. ‘Munshis and Their Masters: The Organization of an Occupational Relationship in the Indian Legal System.’ The Journal of Asian Studies31 (2): 309–28.
43.
MorrisonCharles1974. ‘Clerks and Clients: Paraprofessional Roles and Cultural Identities in Indian Litigation.’ Law & Society Review9 (1): 39–61.
44.
NagarajVasudha. 2010. ‘Local and Customary Forums: Adapting and Innovating Rules of Formal Law.’ Indian Journal of Gender Studies17 (3): 429–50.
45.
Navaro-YashinYael. 2007. ‘Make-Believe Papers, Legal Forms and the Counterfeit: Affective Interactions between Documents and People in Britain and Cyprus.’ Anthropological Theory7 (1): 79–98.
46.
PinneyChristopher. 2004. ‘Photos of the Gods’: The Printed Image and Political Struggle in India. London: Reaktion Books Ltd.
47.
PooleDeborah. 2004. ‘Between Threat and Guarantee: Justice and Community in the Margins of the Peruvian State.’ In Anthropology in the Margins of the State, edited by DasVeenaPooleDeborah, 35–65. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press.
48.
RanderiaShalini. 1992. ‘The Politics of Representation and Exchange among Untouchable Castes in Western India (Gujarat).’ Doctoral diss., Berlin: Free University of Berlin.
49.
RappaportJoanneCumminsTom. 1998. ‘Between Images and Writing: The Ritual of the King’s Quillca.’ Colonial Latin American Review7 (1): 7–32.
50.
RazavyMaryamHaggertyKevin D.2009. ‘Hawala under Scrutiny: Documentation, Surveillance and Trust.’ International Political Sociology3 (2): 39–155.
51.
RilesAnnelise. 2004. ‘Property as Legal Knowledge: Means and Ends.’ Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute10 (4): 775–95.
52.
RilesAnnelise2006a. ‘Introduction: In Response.’ In Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge, edited by RilesAnnelise, 1–38. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
53.
RilesAnnelise2006b. ‘[Deadlines]: Removing the Brackets on Politics in Bureaucratic and Anthropological Analysis.’ In Documents: Artifacts of Modern Knowledge, edited by RilesA., 71–94. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
54.
RobertsonCraig. 2009. ‘A Documentary Regime of Verification: The Emergence of the US Passport and the Archival Problematization of Identity.’ Cultural Studies23 (3): 329–54.
55.
SadiqKamal. 2008. Paper Citizens: How Illegal Immigrants Acquire Citizenship in Developing Countries. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
56.
SharmaAradhanaGuptaAkhil, eds. 2009. The Anthropology of the State: A Reader. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
57.
Singhal-JoshiAbha. 2009. ‘Law and Life in the State of Nature: Archiving Stories from Legal Literacy.’ In Challenging the Rule(s) of Law: Colonialism, Criminology and Human Rights in India, edited by KannabiranKalpanaSinghRanbir. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
58.
SkariaAjay. 1997. ‘Writing, Orality and Power in the Dangs, Western India, 1800s-1920s.’ In Subaltern Studies IX, edited by AminShahidChakrabartyDipesh, 13–58. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
59.
SmithRichard Saumarez. 1985. ‘Rule-by-Records and Rule-by-Reports: Complementary Aspects of the British Imperial Rule of Law.’ Contributions to Indian Sociology (New Series) 19 (1): 153–76.
60.
SriramanTarangini.2014. ‘The State Identification and Welfare Documentary Practices in India.’ Doctoral diss., University of Delhi, Delhi.
61.
SriramanTarangini.2018. In Pursuit of Proof: A History of Identification Documents in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
62.
SrivastavaSanjay. 2012. ‘Duplicity, Intimacy, Community: An Ethnography of ID Cards, Permits and Other Fake Documents in Delhi.’ Thesis Eleven113 (1): 78–93.
63.
TarloE.2001. ‘Paper Truths: The Emergency and Slum Clearance through Forgotten Files.’ In The Everyday State and Society in Modern India, edited by FullerC. J.BénéïV., 68–90. London: C. Hurst & Co. (Publishers) Ltd.
64.
TarloE.2003. Unsettling Memories: Narratives of the Emergency in Delhi. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
65.
VismannC.2008. Files: Law and Media Technology. Translated by Winthrop-YoungGeoffrey. Palo Alto: Stanford University Press.
66.
WeberM.1978. Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology (Vol. 1). Berkeley: University of California Press.
67.
YngvessonB.CoutinS. B.2006. ‘Backed by Papers: Undoing Persons, Histories, and Return.’ American Ethnologist33(2): 177–90.
68.
ZamindarVazira Fazila-Yacoobali. 2007. The Long Partition and the Making of Modern South Asia: Refugees, Boundaries, Histories. New York: Columbia University Press.
