I am sharing my personal experience with you all.

I have worked in many multinational companies. No company had as much faith in me as the notary officer showed. The notary officer saw my Aadhar card, stamped the affidavit, and signed it.

In the olden days, identity cards were printed on letter press machines or typed on typewriters. Identity cards had many stamps and signatures of many people. Each typewriter and letter press machine has many unique imprints.

In the past, very few identity cards had a photograph of the holder.

A notary officer is an experienced professional. Due to his years of experience, he has the ability to verify the signatures of different dignitaries in the locality, different types of stamps, different types of materials, and identity cards printed by different types of typewriters.

But nowadays, any photo editor can edit the identity card and print it exactly the same with the help of a laser printer. Even if a notary officer tries to find out, how can he find out whether the Aadhaar card is genuine or has been photoshopped? Well, this was about the notary office.

Now we will talk a little about the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. I was contesting a case in the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as a pro-se-litigant. Pro-se-litigant means a plaintiff who is contesting his own case.

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission asked me to get most of the documents notarized before submitting them. If a statutory, administrative, or regulatory organization is asking for the affidavit to be notarized by a notary officer to maintain the credibility of the oath, then it is understandable for once. In such a case, if a case of perjury comes to light later, then the regulatory body can complain about it to the court.

But here the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission itself is a quasi judicial body. In such a situation, if the case of false oath (perjury) later comes before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, then what argument will it give, being itself a quasi judicial body?

Yes, a person who is not literate can be asked to get his affidavit notarized so that the notary officer can check the affidavit properly once.

In view of the modern scams in the modern tech savvy society, is it not necessary that the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission itself should thoroughly verify the background of the plaintiff and the accused?

Whether the affidavit of an educated person is notarized or not, if he lies and is caught, is there a provision for a stricter punishment for a notarized affidavit and a lesser punishment for an unnotarized self-attested affidavit?

Yes, it is true that the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission sent me to the Notary Office many times, due to which I had to face some trouble, but seeing the trust of the Notary Officer in me and the trust of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the Notary Office, I was overwhelmed.

Well, the ways of Adam's era are beyond my understanding.

Now I am watching videos on Notary in Youtube to acquire knowledge. If I find the answer to my argument then I will update it here.

According to me, the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission should use a Standard Investigation Checklist like a Usability Checklist.