i) He was murdered at the Red Fort in New Delhi on August 15, 1945;
ii) He died in an air crash at Taihoku (now Taipei) in Taiwan (formally Formosa) on August 18, 1945;
iii) He died at Dehradun, Uttar Pradesh (now Uttaranchal) in 1977;
iv) He died at Sheopurkalan in the State of Madhya Pradesh on May 21, 1977;
v) He died at Ram Bhawan in Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh, on September 16, 1985.
3.1.1 Needless to say, if it is conclusively proved that he died on any of the dates and places mentioned above, the versions relating to death on subsequent dates need not be dealt with as that would be redundant. If, however, it is found that none of the above versions relating to his death has been established, the question whether he is still alive or not has to be answered.
3.2 Considering the facts that the average life span of an Indian is 70-75 years and that Netaji was born on January 23, 1897(which is not disputed) more than 108 years ago, it can safely and surely be presumed that he is no more. While on this point it need be mentioned that some of the deponents and some learned Counsel appearing before this Commission have stated, in no uncertain terms, as there in no truth in any of the versions relating to Netaji’s death it must be presumed that he is still alive for, according to them, a person can live beyond that age of 100 years. In support of this submission they have drawn the attention of the Commission to a photograph annexed to a statement supported by an affidavit filed by Shri Jyotish Chandra Bose and others wherefrom it appears that a Sadhu aged 124 years was found to be living in the year 2000.
3.2.1 It is, of course, true that it is ‘possible’ for a person to live beyond the average life span of an Indian and in a rare case even more than 100 years, but any person or authority entrusted with the duty of investigating into a question of fact has to find an answer thereto depending on whether it is ‘probable’ – and not ‘possible’. The distinction between the above two expressions is that while the former means what is likely to happen in the common course of events, the later means what is unlikely to happen in the common course of events but may happen in exceptional cases. Judged in the light of the above Principle, if it is found that none of the versions regarding Netaji’s death is substantiated the only legitimate inference that can be drawn at this distant point of time is that Netaji is no more. Thus said, the truth or otherwise of the different versions relating to Netaji’s death may now be delved into.