Q. What is the Golden Rule of Interpretation?

Answer.
The golden rule of interpretation was propounded in the case of Grey v. Pearson by Lord
Wensleydale in the year 1957. This is why it is also known as Wensleydale’s Golden Rule. This rule is
the modification of the literal rule. The golden rule modifies the language of the words in a statute to
successfully interpret the actual meaning of the legislation. It takes into account the context in which
the words are used so that justice can be done to the intention of the legislation. It is to be noted
that the rule can be used only when the language of the statute is ambiguous or grammatically
incorrect. Thus the judges need to be extremely careful with their interpretation and only exercise
this power when it is absolutely necessary.

The golden rule can be applied in a narrow or a broad sense:

Narrow approach – This approach is taken when the words in the statute are capable of
multiple interpretations. Through this approach, the judge is able to apply the meaning
which is clear and properly portrays the true intention of the statute. This approach was used
in the R v. Allen, (1872) case.
Broad approach – This approach is taken when there exists only one possible interpretation
of a word. In some cases, the meaning might cause absurdity. In order to avoid this problem,
the judges can use this approach to modify the meaning of the word but this modification
should be limited and shouldn’t deviate from the actual intention of the legislation. In Re.
Sigsworth: Bedford v. Bedford (1954), this approach was used.
The golden rule of interpretation is the second step after the literal rule. As we’ve discussed,
the literal rule would apply only when the plain meaning of the word gives justice to the
intention of the legislation. When the literal rule fails due to the existence of multiple
meanings of a word in the statute, the golden rule is to be applied.

Advantages of the Golden Rule

An apparent advantage of the rule is that it allows the judge to modify the meaning of words
to remove absurdity and apply the modified term effectively in the case at hand.
When the literal rule of interpretation fails to achieve clarity, the golden rule steps in to help
the court.
It guides the judges in applying appropriate principles while interpreting the meaning of the
statute.
It takes away the requirement of amending the legislation to make minute changes as the
judges can do that for the Parliament. For example, in the R v. Allen case discussed above,
the Court stepped in and closed the loopholes by applying the golden rule. The
interpretation was in line with the original intention of the Parliament. Thus, no
amendments were required.
Disadvantages of the Golden Rule
The golden rule is restricted in its use as it can be used only when the literal rule leads to
ambiguities in interpretation. Its use thus becomes limited and rare.
It is unpredictable and lacks guidelines.
One of the main disadvantages of the rule is that judges can twist the meaning of the words
and change the law. This would cause a disbalance in the separation of powers.
Q. Discuss the classification of statutes with example?
Classification of Statute

Generally, Statute can be classified with reference to its duration, Method, Object, and extent of
Application.

Classification with reference to duration

1. Temporary Statute

A temporary statute is one which where its period of operation and validity has been fixed by the
statute itself. Such an act continues in force unless repealed earlier, until the time so fixed. After
the expiry of the act if the legislature wishes to continue it, a new enactment is required. The
Finance Act is the temporary act and is required to be passed every year.

2. Permanent or the perpetual statute

this type of statute is the one in which the statute remains effective until it is substituted or
repealed by the further legislative act.

Classification with reference to method

1. Mandatory, Imperative or Obligatory statute

A mandatory statute is one which compels performance of certain things, or compels that
certain things must be done in a certain manner or form.

2. Directory statue

A directory statute merely directs or permits a thing to be done without compelling its manner
or performance.

In H.V. Kamath vs. Ahmad Ishaque: it was held that mandatory provision has to be strictly
observed whereas substantial compliance of a directory provision is enough.

Classification with reference to object

1. Codifying Statute

A codifying statute is one which codifies the law, or in other words which purports to state
exhaustively the whole of law upon a specific subject. The code contains the pre- existing
provisions in different statute on the subject as well as the common law on it. The foremost
purpose of the codifying statute is to present an orderly and authoritative statement of the
leading rules of the law on a given subject whether those rules are to be found in a statute or
common law.
 Example: The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is a codifying statue with respect to intestate
succession among Hindus.

Q. Discuss with case laws how taxing statutes are interpreted by the
judiciary?
Taxation statute is a fiscal statute which imposes the pecuniary burden on the
taxpayer. So such statutes are construed strictly. Plain, clear and direct
grammatical meaning is given. Where there are two possible outcomes then that
interpretation is given which is in favour of assessee. 

Any taxation statute involves three stages firstly, the subject on which tax is
levied or imposed, secondly, the assessment of the liability of assessee
and lastly, the recovery once the assessment is made. The first stage is where
charging provisions of the act are involved. These charging provisions must be
clearly provided in the statute. These charging provisions provide the extent and
coverage of the subjects as to whom the tax is applicable. It also provides the
outline in form of subjects which the legislature wants to cover under the law.
Charging provisions are to be interpreted strictly as it results in financial burden.
There cannot be any ambiguity and meaning which is clear, obvious, direct is
given. Nothing can be inferred to substantiate the intention of the legislature or
purpose for which the law was made. Once the revenue shows that particular
subject is covered by law then tax is applicable for all those subjects. But if it
fails to proof then no tax can be imposed by extending the meaning.

Principal of equity has no role to play in case of taxation law. It is because there
is lot of deeming legal fiction involved in tax laws. Thus, whatever is written
must be strictly followed without considering its justness. If the words are clear,
then court has to give that meaning irrespective of consequences it resulted into
or in other words even if such construction is unequitable, then also Court is
bound due to legal fiction. Court cannot meet the deficiency by extending the
provisions of the statute. It is duty of the legislature to rectify it through
amendments. 

In a Taxation statute, if a word has a clear meaning, then in that case, the court
is bound to follow the clear meaning even if such meaning results in absurd
results. It is in legislature’s domain to rectify such absurdity. In case of taxation
statutes, Courts cannot extend the scope of law by giving meanings to word
which are unclear or uncertain. This is based on the reason that if legislature had
thought of such situation then it would have covered it by using appropriate
description and words under the principal act or taxation authority would have
issued some notification clarifying the same. 

The case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kores India Ltd. (AIR 1977 SC 132) is
relevant. In this case, the issue was pertaining to inclusion of carbon paper in
the definition of word “paper”. It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in
common parlance word paper is one which is used for writing, packaging and
printing whereas carbon paper is used entirely for different purpose. Moreover,
manufacturing process of carbon paper is entirely different and complicated from
that of normal paper. So, Court held carbon paper will not be included in normal
paper so as to make it subject to taxation. It was held that meaning of paper is
quiet clear and there is no need to interpret it so as to extend its meaning to
include carbon paper. Thus, Courts are not required to extend the meaning to
cover the subjects which on the face cannot be included in common parlance. It
is only when specifically provided by statute then only it becomes subject to
tax. 

The words used in the taxation law should be given meaning which is understood
by general public in daily routine and one which is popular. Such meaning should
be given to words which people to whom law is applicable are familiar with. 

The second and third stage involved in any tax laws are assessment of the
liability and recovery of dues respectively. These provisions are machinery
provisions which provides for technicalities and procedure to be followed under
the act to make it functional. These provisions are to be interpreted fairly and
liberally to promote the intention of the legislature. In case of contradiction
whereby two meaning are coming out then one which is reasonable, which will
assist in fulfilling the intention of the legislature and solving the purpose for
which law was enacted is preferred. They are to be interpreted in such a way so
as to enforce and apply charging provisions smoothly.

In case of exemptions, strict rule does not apply rather liberal rule is applied. All
the conditions under which exemptions are given must be clearly specified. Once
the assessee has shown that all the conditions precedent required to claim
exemptions are fulfilled then he is entitled to claim exemptions. Once the
assessee falls within the category of exemptions, then such exemption should be
allowed. It cannot be denied on the basis of assumed or likely intention of the
authority making the law. 

The doctrine of Substantial Compliance is based on the principle of equity which

is also applicable to taxation laws. According to this doctrine, if the conditions for
claiming exemptions are met substantially or only a few minor procedural
requirements are not fulfilled which does not hamper the purpose for which such
law was made then in that case substantial compliance can also entitles one to
claim exemptions. Applicability of such doctrine is based on case to case basis as
it results are different depending on facts of each case, extent of compliance,
whether partial compliance fulfils the essence, object and purpose of the law.

Q. State the principle of interpretation and

mischief rule?

Meaning
Often referred to as Haydon’s Rule, the Mischief Rule of Interpretation is one of
the most important rules of interpretation. In legal parlance, the word mischief is
normally understood to be a kind of specific injury or damage resulting from
another person’s action or inaction. But in relation to rules of
interpretation, mischief means to prevent the misuse of provisions of a
statute. It is widely known as the mischief rule primarily because it focuses on
curing the mischief.

As per the Mischief Rule of Interpretation, a statute must be construed in such a

way as to suppress the Mischief. Mischief should not have a place in the statute.
If an attempt is made to add Mischief in any statute, then it must be prevented
by the Mischief Rule of interpretation.

ADVERTISEMENT
The meaning of the mischief rule of interpretation can be better understood
with the help of a UK case law. The case of Smith v. Huge[v] revolved around
the Street Offences Act, 1959. The statute was enacted to prohibit prostitutes
from solicitating on roads to the passing public. Post the enactment of the said
Act, the prostitutes began soliciting from their windows and balconies. Since,
this defeated the intention of the legislation, some prostitutes were charged
under Section 1(1) of the said Act which read as

“It shall be an offence for a person aged 18 or over (whether male or female)
persistently to loiter or solicit in a street or public place for the purpose of
prostitution.”
In response to these charges, the prostitutes pleaded that they were not
soliciting from “the streets”. Due to the misrepresentation of the meaning and
intention of the said Act by the prostitutes, the court rejected their argument
and applied the mischief rule of interpretation by stating that the inducement by
them from the windows and balconies of their houses is also prohibited under
the Act. The court justified this by stating that the purpose of the Act was to
prevent prostitution. Hence, due to the application of the mischief rule, the court
held that ‘the windows and balconies of their homes would count for an
extension of the word and would come within the ambit of the word ‘street’.

Furthermore, the Allahabad High Court in the case of Rex v. Ramdayal,

[vi] the learned judge stated “A statute is to be construed as to suppress the
mischief aimed at and to advance the remedy provided by it. Widest scope
should be given to the language for this purpose.”

Similarly, the Supreme Court in Sewantilal v. Income Tax

Commissioner[vii] stated “it is a sound rule of interpretation that a statute
should be so construed as to prevent the mischief and to advance the remedy
according to the true intention of the makers of the statute.”
Haydon’s Case

As mentioned before, Mischief rule of interpretation can be traced back to

Haydon’s Case[viii]. It is considered to be a landmark judgment for the Mischief
Rule of Interpretation because the Mischief Rule seemed to have evolved from
this case. In the aforementioned case, it was held that there are four criterion
which have to be met for the true interpretation of all the statutes in general.
They are as follows: –

1. What was the common law before the making of the Act/statute?
2. What was the mischief for which the present statute was enacted?
3. What remedy did the Parliament sought or had resolved and
appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth?
4. The true reason of the remedy.
The core purpose behind the rule is to suppress the mischief and advance the
remedy. Therefore, there lies a duty upon the Courts of Law to construct the
statute in a way such that it suppresses the mischief and promotes the remedy
in accordance with the intention of the legislature. Nonetheless, in the matter
of The Commissioner of Income Tax – Madhya Pradesh and Bhopal v.
Sodra Devi,[ix] Justice Bhagwati stated that “It is clear that unless there is any
such ambiguity it would not be open to the court to depart from the normal rule
of construction which is that the intention of the Legislature should be primarily
gathered from the words which are used.”

Q . What are internal and external aids to the

interpretation?

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-

  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 mentioned 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.
  Long Title
The long title is mentioned 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 provides 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. 
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 the preamble to ascertain the true meaning of the provision.

Important Case Law

State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali, in this  case 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
took 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.

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 the constitution many times marginal notes are
referred because they are made by constituent assembly.

Important Case Law

In Bengal Immunity Company v. State of Bihar, 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.

Important Case Law

In the case of Tolley v. Giddings, the interpretation of section 217 of the
Road Traffic Act was in question, which provided 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 the sub heading is Penalization of taking
motor vehicles 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 for an offence.”

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 a situation, the court may refer to the
dictionary meaning of the statute to find out the meaning of the word in
ordinary sense.

The meaning of such words shall be interpreted so as to make sure that it is

speaking about the particular statute because words bear different meanings
in different contexts.

Important Case 
In Motipur zamindary company private limited v. State of Bihar, the
question was whether sales tax can be levied on Sugarcane.
The applicant argued that it is a green vegetable and should be exempted
from tax. The dictionary meaning of vegetable said anything which derived
or obtained from the plants. The Supreme Court 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. 

Constituent Debates/Speech
It shall compromise all such debates 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, 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.

Q.How penal statutes are interpreted

Interpretation of Penal Statutes Penal Statutes may be defined as those statutes that impose penal
liability on a person who is guilty of any offence. The word penal connotes some form of punishment
imposed against the individual by mandate of the State. In Halsbury’s laws of England a penal statute
has been described as one whose primary object is expressly enforceable by fine, imprisonment or
other punishment. A statute is to be regarded as penal if it imposes a fine, penalty or forfeiture other
than a penalty in the nature of liquidated damages, or other penalties that are of the nature of civil
remedies.

In a penal law if there appears to be a reasonable dubiety or ambiguity, it shall be decided in favour
of the person who would be liable to the penalisation. If a penal provision fairly be so construed as to
avoid the punishment, it must be so interpreted. If there can be two reasonable interpretations of a
penal provision, the more lenient should be made applicable. Punishment can be meted to one only
if the plain words extension of the meaning of the word is allowable. A penalty cannot be imposed
on the basis that the object of the statute so desired. According to Maxwell, “the prerequisite of
express language for the creation of an offence, in interpreting strictly words setting out the
elements of an offence in requiring the fulfilment to the letter of statutory conditions precedent to
the infliction of punishment; and in insisting on the strict observance of technical provisions
concerning criminal procedure and jurisdiction.” Unless the words of a statute clearly made an act
criminal, it shall not be construed as criminal. If there is any ambiguity in the words which set out the
elements of an act or omission declared to 2 be an offence, so that it is doubtful whether the act or
omission falls within the statutory words, the ambiguity will be resolved in favour of the person
charged. The court will inflict punishment on a person only when the circumstances of the case fall
unambiguously fall under the letter of the law. Legislation which deals with the jurisdiction and the
procedure relation to imposition of the penalties will be strictly construed. Where certain procedural
requirements have been laid down by a statute to be completed in a statute dealing with
punishments, the court is duty bound to see that all these requirements have been complied with
before sentencing the accused. In case of any doubt the benefit has to go to the accused even up to
the extent of acquitting him on some technical grounds. Penal provision cannot be extended by
implication to a particular case or circumstances. The rule exhibits a preference for the liberty of the
subject and in a case of ambiguity enables the court to resolve the doubt in favour of the subject and
against the Legislature which has failed to express itself clearly, but this rule is now-a-days of limited
application. The rule was originally evolved to mitigate the rigours of monstrous sentences of trivial
offences and although the necessity and that strictness have now vanished, the difference in
approach made to penal statute as against any other statute still persists. A penal provision must be
definite. It is a basic rule of legal jurisprudence that than an enactment is void for vagueness if its
prohibitions are not clearly defined. Pollock, CB said: “whether there be any difference left between
a criminal statute and any other statute not creating offence, I should say that in criminal statute you
must be quite sure that the offence charged is within the letter of the law.” In Anup Bhushan Vohra v.
Registrar General, High Court of Judicature at Calcutta on (2011) the Apex Court held that the
contempt proceedings being quasi-criminal in nature, burden and standard of proof is the same as
required in criminal cases. The charges have to be framed as per the statutory rules framed for the
purpose and proved beyond reasonable doubt keeping in mind that the alleged contemnor is
entitled to the benefit of doubt. Law does not permit imposing any punishment in contempt
proceedings on mere probabilities; equally, the court cannot punish the alleged contemnor without
any foundation merely on conjectures and surmises. As observed above, the contempt proceeding
being quasi-criminal in nature require strict adherence to the procedure prescribed under the rules
applicable in such proceedings.

Q. All Four maxins with case laws?

Ejusdem generis

Ejusdem generis is a Latin phrase that means ‘of the same kind’. It is used to interpret legislation that
is written in a haphazard manner. When a law mentions certain classifications of people or things
before referring to them in general, the general assertions only apply to the same people or things
who are expressly named. For example, if legislation mentions automobiles, trucks, tractors,
motorcycles, and other motor-powered vehicles, the term ‘vehicles’ does not include aircraft since
the list is limited to land-based transportation.

Thakur Amar Singhji v. State of Rajasthan (1955)

The legitimacy of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 was challenged in
Thakur Amar Singhji v. State of Rajasthan (1955). It was claimed that the holders of one of the
tenures, known as Bhomichar tenure, were not jagirdars.

Lilavati Bai v. Bombay State (1957)

The petitioner in Lilavati Bai v. Bombay State (1957) was the widow of a tenant of certain property,
which she had deserted. The respondent requisitioned the premises after discovering that it was
unoccupied under Section 6(4)(a) of the Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, for the public purpose
of housing a government officer.

noscitur a socii -
the principle of noscitur a socii has been used in the various circumstances as were present. In order
to present a holistic picture, the author has also attempted to present the offshoot rule of ejusdem
generis, as well as the differences between the two. Although the judiciary has taken the pains to use
the appropriate canon of interpretation, an element of caution has to be ever present while using
either of two rules, so as to avoid any discrepancies. This is to be noted because there have been
instances of the wrong rule being used, as in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohanlal
and Ors.[28], where the rule of ejusdem generis had been applied regarding the interpretation of the
phrase “other authorities” in Art. 12 of the Constitution of India.

expressio unius est exclusio alterius

Definition: Expressio unius est exclusio alterius is a Latin term used in law that means "to express or
include one thing implies the exclusion of the other, or of the alternative." This means that if a law or
contract explicitly mentions one thing, it is assumed that other things are not included or allowed.

Example: If a job posting says "must have a bachelor's degree in computer science," it implies that
applicants without a bachelor's degree in computer science are not eligible for the job.

Explanation: The example illustrates how the term works in practice. The job posting explicitly
mentions that a bachelor's degree in computer science is required, which implies that applicants
without this degree are not eligible. The term is used to help interpret laws and contracts and to
understand what is included and excluded based on what is explicitly stated.

reddendo singula singulis

Reddendo singula singulis is a Latin phrase that means "by rendering each to each." It refers to the
practice of assigning or distributing separate things to separate people or separate words to separate
subjects. This rule of construction is used to give effect to the intention of the parties who drafted
the instrument.
When dividing a property between siblings, reddendo singula singulis would require that each sibling
receives a specific portion of the property.

In a contract, reddendo singula singulis would ensure that each clause is applied to the appropriate
party and not confused with another.

These examples illustrate how reddendo singula singulis is used to ensure that things are distributed
or assigned to the correct person or subject, avoiding confusion or misunderstandings.