Backlog Internal Assessment

Judicial Process & Interpretation Of Statues

Submitted by:
Arindam Arav Prakash
18010126013
6th Semester , Division : A
2018-23
1. An Aid is considered as a tool or device which helps in interpreting a statute, the
court can take help from internal aids to interpretation (i.e. within statutes) or external
aids to interpretation (i.e. outside the statutes)

A. Internal aids to interpretation

Internal aids means those aids which are available in the statute itself, court can
interpret the statute by employing such aids which are as follows:
Title of the statute
There are basically two types of title-
I. Short Title - The short title of the Act is only its name which is given solely for the
purpose of reference and identification.
Short title is mention under Section 1 of the Acts and ends with the year of passing of
the Act.
Example- Section 1 of CPC says, This Act may be cited as Code of Civil Procedure,
1908.' Section 1 of Indian contract Acts says, This Act may be called as Indian
Contract Act, 1872.

II. Long Title - The long title is mention under certain acts whose purpose is to give a
general description about the object of the act.
However, it is not considered as a conclusive aid to interpretation of statutes as it
doesn't resolve ambiguity arising in words or expression under statutory provision but
only provide a general idea of the act.
Example- The long title of CrPC says, An act to consolidate and amend the laws
relating to the criminal procedure. Also, the long title of CPC says, An act to
consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the courts of civil
judicature.

Preamble
Preamble is a tool for internal aid to interpretation as it contains the main objects and
reasons of the Act.
The rule of interpretation of preamble is that when a language of an enactment is clear
and unambiguous, the preamble has no part to play but if more than one interpretation
is possible, a help can be taken from preamble to ascertain the true meaning of the
provision.
The preamble is mention on the very first page of the act but modern acts doesn't pass
with preamble which is declining its importance. In State of West Bengal v. Anwar
Ali1, the constitutionality of Section 5 of the West Bengal special courts act, 1950 was
challenged on the grounds of violative of Article 14 of the constitution as the
provision in the act authorize state government to select a particular case which
deserved to be tried by special courts having special procedure. The Supreme Court
take help of the preamble of the said Act and held that state government has discretion
to choose such cases.

Marginal notes
Marginal notes are inserted at the side of the sections in an act which express the
effect of the section but they are not part of statute.
They are also known as Side notes and are inserted by drafters and not legislators.

1
AIR 1952 SC 75
The rule of interpretation is that in olden times a help is used to be taken from
marginal notes when the clear meaning of the provision is in doubt but as per modern
view of the court, marginal notes doesn't have any role to play because either they are
inserted by legislators nor does they form the part of the statute.
However, for interpreting constitution many times marginal notes are referred because
they are made by constituent assembly.

Bengal Immunity Company v. State of Bihar2, the Supreme Court held that the
marginal notes of Article 286 is the part of the Constitution of India which talks about
Restrictions as to imposition of the tax on the sale or purchase of goods therefore, it
could be relied on to furnish a clue to the purpose and meaning of the article.

Headings
Headings are prefixed to sections or a group or set of sections.
These headings have been treated by courts as preambles to those sections or sets of
sections. The rule of interpretation is that the heading can't control the plain words of
the provision but if after the plain reading of the section more than one meaning is
possible, only then the court may seek guidance from the headings.

Tolley v. Giddings3, interpretation of section 217 of Road Traffic Act was in question
which provides that a person could be held liable of an offence if he allowed himself
to be driven away in a motor vehicle without the consent of its master. The heading of
the provision is Miscellaneous and general' and sub heading is Penalization of taking
motor vehicle without authority'. The court held that headings to the section clearly
explain the intention of the legislature and thus the passenger would be held liable of
an offence.

Illustration
Illustration are appended to a section of a statute with a view to illustrating the law
explained in the provision.
Such illustration manifest the intention of the legislature and can be referred in the
case of ambiguity or repugnancy.
However, the court emphasis through various judgments that it doesn't explain the
whole principle explain in the section through illustration nor does it curtail the ambit
of the section.
In the case of repugnancy between section and illustration, section will prevail.
Example- Section 378 of theft in IPC has 16 illustrations attached to it.

Explanation
The explanations are inserted with the purpose of explaining the meaning of a
particular provision and to remove doubts which might creep up if the explanation
had not been inserted.
The purpose of explanations are to explain the meaning and intention of act, to clarify
in case of obscurity or vagueness and to provide additional support to the object of the
act.
However, it doesn't expand or curtail the meaning of the provision but only tries to
remove uncertainty and in the case of conflict between explanation and main section,
the duty of the court is to harmonize the two.
2
AIR 1966 SC 661
3
(1964) 2QB 354
Example- section 108 of IPC defines the word abettor' which has five explanation
attach to it.

Definition or Interpretation clause

It define certain words used elsewhere in the body of statute with the purpose to avoid
the necessity of frequent repetitions in describing the subject matter and extend the
natural meaning of some words as per the statute. It also define intention of the
legislature in respect of words mention in statute and avoid confusion.

The rule of interpretation is that whenever the words means or means and include' are
used in definition, it makes the definition exhaustive and don't allow to interpret the
definition widely but if the word includes' is used in the definition it provide widest
interpretation possible to the definition or enlarge the ordinary meaning of the word.

However, if the definition clause will result in an absurdity, the court will not apply
such definitions and the definition clause of one act can't be used to explain same
word used in another statute except in the case of statutes in pari materia.

Mahalaxmi Oils Mils v. State of A.P 4, interpretation of word tobacco was in question
which said tobacco means any form of tobacco whether cured or uncured or
manufactured or not and includes leaf stalks and steams of tobacco plant. The SC held
that the definition is exhaustive and refused to include tobacco seeds under the
definition of tobacco.

Punctuation
Punctuation are put in the form of colon, semi colon, comma, full stop, dash, hyphen,
brackets etc
In earlier times statutes are passed without punctuations and therefore, the courts were
not concerned with looking at punctuations but in modern times statutes are passed
with punctuations.
The rule of interpretation is that while interpreting the provision in punctuated form, if
court feels repugnancy or ambiguity the court shall read the whole provision without
any punctuation and if the meaning is clear will so interpret it without attaching any
importance.

Schedules
Schedule are the part of statutes which are mentioned at the end of the act.
It contains details prescribe form of working out policies and contains subjects in the
form of lists.
In the case of clash between schedule and the main body of an act, the main body
shall prevail.
Example- Article 1 of the constitution provides that India shall be union of states and
in schedule 1 name of the states with its territories are mention.

Saving Clause
Saving Clause are generally appended in cases of repeal and reenactment of a new
statute. It is inserted in the repealing statute.

4
AIR 1985 SC 335
By this the rights already created under repealed enactment are not disturbed nor are
new rights created by it.
In the case of clash between the main part of statute and a saving clause, the saving
clause has to be rejected.

Proviso
The proviso to a section has the natural presumption that enacting part of the section
would have included the subject matter of the proviso.
The proviso serve four different purposes- qualify or exempt certain provision,
provide mandatory condition to be fulfilled by to make enactment workable, act as
optional addenda and become integral part of the enactment.
The rule of interpretation of proviso is that it can neither nullify the implication of
main enactment nor can enlarge the scope of main enactment and can only be referred
in case of ambiguity in the section.
In case of conflict between main enactment and proviso, it must be harmoniously
construct or in the view of many jurist proviso will prevail as it is the last intention of
the legislature.
Example- Article 16(4) is considered as proviso of Article 16(1) held in T. Devadasan
v. Union of India 5.

Exception
Exception are generally added to an enactment with the purpose of exempting
something which would otherwise fall within the ambit of the main provision.
In case of repugnancy between exception and main enactment, the latter must be
relied upon. However, in many cases exceptions are relied being the last intention of
legislature.
Example: Section 300 of IPC has five exceptions attached to it.

Proviso has a wider function than exception as, an exception only exempt certain
things to fall in the main enactment whereas, proviso not only exempt certain cases
but also provide a mandatory condition, qualification or an optional addenda to the
enactment.
Proviso follows the main enactment whereas exception is the part of main enactment.

B. External aids to interpretation

External aids are the aids which are not available inside the statute but outside the
statute, the court may seek help to the external aids in case of repugnancy or
inconsistency in the statutory provision which are as follows:
Dictionaries
When a word used in the statute is not defined therein or if defined but the meaning is
unclear only in such situation, the court may refer to the dictionary meaning of the
statute to find out meaning of the word in ordinary sense.

The meaning of such words shall be interpreted so to make sure that it is speaking
about the particular statute because words bears different meaning in different
context.
Motipur zamindary company private limited v. State of Bihar 6, the question was
whether sales tax can be levied on Sugarcane.
5
AIR 1985 SC 335
6
AIR 1962 SC 660
The applicant argued that it is green vegetable and should be exempted from tax. The
dictionary meaning of vegetable said anything which derived or obtained from the
plants. The SC rejected dictionary meaning and held that in common parlance
vegetable is something which is grown in kitchen garden and used during lunch and
dinner and held that sugarcane is not vegetable.

Text Books
The court while construing an enactment, may refer to the standard textbooks to clear
the meaning. Although, the courts are not bound to accept such view.
The court time and again referred to mulla, kautiliya, manu, arthshastra.

Example: in Kesavananda Bharthi case7, judges quoted large number of books.

Statement of objects and reasons

The statement of object and reasons are attached to the bill which describe the objects,
purpose and the reason for the bill. It also gives understanding of the background, the
antecedent state of affairs and the object the law seeks to achieve.
The parliament before passing a bill must take into consideration that what object a
bill serve to achieve.
However, it is not considered as conclusive aid to interpretation because doesn't
impart the true meaning to the statutory provision.

Constituent Debates/Speech
It shall compromises all such debate which had taken place in the parliament at the
time of formation of Constitution of India.
In case of inconsistency or repugnancy in the Constitution the court can clearly refer
to such debates.

Indra Sawhney v. Union of India 8, the interpretation of the expression backward class
of citizen' used in Article 16(4) was in question before the court. The SC under this
case referred to the speech given by B.R. Ambedkar to understand the context,
background and object behind its use of the given expression.

Legislative Debates/Speech
It is referred as to debates or speeches which are made in the course of passing a bill
in the parliament by the parliamentarians to put forth their view.
It is not considered as a conclusive aid to interpretation and is therefore, not
admissible because many times speeches are influenced by the political pressure or
maybe incorrect to rely upon.

Committee Reports
Before the framing of the Bill, usually the matter is referred to a committee to
consider it in detail and give its report thereon.
These reports of the commissions and committee have been referred to as evidence of
historical facts or of surrounding circumstances and used for interpreting the Act.

7
AIR 1973 SC 1461
8
AIR 1993 SC 477
When there is an ambiguity in the meaning of a provision and the act was passed on
the recommendation of a committee report, aid can be taken from that report to
interpret the provision.
Example: the criminal amendment act was based on the recommendation by J.S.
Verma Committee Report such report can be referred in case of any ambiguity in
amendment.

Foreign laws and decisions

Judges may refer to foreign laws and decision if the jurisprudence of both the
countries is same, similarity in political system and ideology, when there is no
domestic law on point and if the Indian court believe that decision passed by the
foreign court is not arbitrary.
However, the foreign courts or decision have only persuasive value as the courts in
India are not bound by the foreign courts.

3. The term Interpretation has been derived from the Latin term interpretari which
means to explain or understand. Every statute has to be interpreted by the judge the
way it is meant to be understood.
The purpose of interpretation is always to find out what the statute stands for, what is
the defect it intends to remove and what is the remedy it seeks to advance. The basic
principle of the construction of statutes is that, the words have to be read and
understood in their true literal sense. The Literal Rule is the first rule applied by the
judges. The literal rule is also called grammatical rule by some jurists.
The literal rule means that a judge has to consider what the statute says ‘literally’, i.e
its simple plain meaning without any ambiguity. It is said that the words themselves
best declare the intention of the law- givers.

The interpretation or construction means the process by which the courts seek to
ascertain the intent of the Legislature through the medium of the authoritative form in
which it is expressed. In the literal rule of interpretation, the law has to be considered
as it is and the judges cannot go beyond ‘litera legis’. The literal interpretation is a
means to ascertain the ’ratio legis’ of the statute.

In the literal rule, the intention of the parliament while framing the statute, is the
ordinary meaning of the words used. Justice Jervis, has described the meaning of
literal rule in Abley v Gale9. Lord Diplock observed in Duport Steel Ltd v SirS 10that:
Where the meaning of the statutory words is plain and unambiguous it is not then for
the judges to invent fancied ambiguities as an excuse for failing to give effect to its
plain meaning because they consider the consequences for doing so would be
inexpedient, or even unjust or immoral.

The words of a statute are to be first understood in their natural, ordinary or popular
sense and phrases and sentences are construed according to their grammatical
meaning, unless that leads to some absurdity or unless there is something in the
context, or in the object of the statute to suggest the contrary11.

9
20L.J.C.P(N.S) 233 [1851]
10
QBD 1980
11
Crawford v. Spooner, (1846) 4 MIA 179
No judge can deviate from the meaning of the statute though decision maybe unjust.
The words of a statute must prima facie be given their ordinary meaning12.
The literal rule accepts supremacy of the Parliament: the right to make laws, even
though sometimes, they seem absurd. In the literal rule of interpretation, there is no
contrary meaning within the statute.
Where there is no ambiguity in words, the question of intention ought not to be
admitted. The words are plain and clear under literal rule. The literal rule helps the
judge in administering justice in a neutral manner.When the language of the statute is
clear and unambiguous it is not necessary to look into the legislative intent or object
of the Act13. The literal rule puts a virtual boundary upon the judges from not
deviating from the ordinary or literal meaning of the words used in the statute. When
the language of the statute is uncertain or ambiguous on then the judge have the duty
to interpret. The literal rule appreciates precision and certainty which help the
reduction of litigation.
The judges have to act upon the true intention of the legislature. The judges have no
liberty to modify the law even if they feel that the true intention of the legislature have
not been expressed rightly in the law.

Though literal interpretation must be accepted, it should not be followed if the statute
is defective.

The advantages of the literal rule:

 The literal rule enables the common man to understand the statue.
 The intent of the legislature is simple and clear.
 The literal rule respects the parliamentary supremacy in administration of
justice.
 Under literal rule the law is quite predictable.

The dis-advantages of the literal rule:

 The literal rule can lead to unreasonable decision making.
 The English language is ambiguous.
 The application of literal meaning in all situations and circumstances is not
possible.
 The rule expects standards of unattainable perfection from the parliamentary
draftsman.

The rules to be followed in literal rule of interpretation of statutes:

 Ejusdem Generis:
Ejusdem Generis is where general words follow anenumeration of persons or things,
by words of a particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to be
construed in their widest extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or
12
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd v. Sardar Sadhu Singh, AIR 1944 Raj 44.
13
Arul Nadar v. Authorised Officer, Land Reforms (1998) 7 SCC 157
things of the same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned. Ejusdem
Generis means assuming general meaning of words or words similar kind.

 Casus Omissus:
Casus Omissus means cases omitted. Casus omissus also means a point not provided
by the statute. It is basically a situation not provided for by a statute or contract and
therefore governed by case-law or new-judge made law. It is a canon of construction,
requiring the court to draw up principles of statutory construction, which are then
going to be followed by subsequent judges in their judicial decisions.

 Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius:

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius means that one thing having been mentioned
the other is excluded. Lopes, L.J opines this maxim means a valuable servant but a
dangerous master14. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius, it is a maxim for
ascertaining the intention of the legislature. Where the statutory language is plain and
the meaning clear, there is no scope for applying the rule.

Criticisms of literal rule of interpretation of statutes:

Literal rule claim that it rests on the erroneous assumption that words have a fixed
meaning. The literal rule of interpretation leads to injustice. There are chances of
creating misleading precedents while deciding cases. The courts do not have the
power to alter the words of the legislature, it is not open for judicial innovations. The
words cannot be understood properly without the context in which it is used.
The strict adherence to this principle may cause injustice and sometimes it might give
results which are quite contrary to general intention of statute or common sense[15].
Due to the absurdity that is prevalent in literal rule of interpretation, the court may
ascertain a literal meaning which was not intended by the legislature. If the court
applies literal rule and feels that the interpretation is morally wrong then they cannot
avoid giving the interpretation[16].

With changing and adopting of new policies and legislature, the statutes cannot be
interpreted in their traditional way i.e, taking the literal meaning of the words used.
Hence these make literal rule not suitable to present situation.

14
Coluhan v. Brooks (1886)21 Q.B.D 52