Interpretation : ‘interpretari' - to 'explain / translate', IoS is an act of explaining the

meaning of a thing, its 'an act of interpreting and deciphering the intent behind a statute'. IoS
is process to know / determine the intention behind the law, Judiciary deciphering specific
intent of legislature making law
When I done, where stautes has : *ambiguous language, *unclear purpose / intent, *multiple
meanings, *multiple views, *contradictory meaning / meaning defeats purpose of staute.
Need :
Complicated process of drafting laws leads to variety of gaps & ambiguity in statute.
Words, phrases, terms used in statute can have varying meanings due to multifaceted nature
of language
Law drafted by group of several people, leads to incoherence in language
Statues may use technical language due to complicated subject matter
Applicability of law changes with new developments.
Kinds :
1) Literal I: grammatical I, Judges are not allowed to add or modify the letter of law, should
strictly follow the language & directly translate its meaning. Lalita UP
2) Functional I: Judges deviate from literal meaning, to decipher real intent behind law,
applicability : when statute is : inconsistent, incomplete, ambiguous language, logical flaw in
text of law.

Rules of Interpretation of Statutes (RioS) : followed by judiciary for IoS to administer justice
with uniformity & coherence.
Primary (main) includes Secondary
Rule of Strict Interpretation Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius
Rule of Liberal Interpretation Contemporanea Expositio Est Optima Et
Literal Rule Fortissima in Lege
Rule of Reasonable Construction Noscitur a Sociis
Golden Rule
Mischief Rule
Rule of Harmonious Construction
Ejusdem Generis
Beneficial Construction
Purposive Construction

Rule of Strict Interpretation : I which is most favorable to accused / defendant would be

applicable, while I criminal legislation
Rule of Liberal Interpretation : law is interpreted in context of document & in accordance
with intent of author.
Literal Rule : consider what lawmakers are trying to say, not what they might mean (literal /
ordinary / clear meaning of words is considered/assigned having no need to modify / alter),
because legislature chose every word deliberately & intended that very word to be legally
binding, no other words can be added or used. Nand HP
Only applied if words of statute are clear & unambiguous, while language is plain.
Fisher v Bell (weapon for sale, invitation to offer is not sale), MC v RSTC (application within
30days), TCS v AP (computer software is taxable)
Adv: 1. The court cannot apply its own bias. 2. The rule provides consistency in
interpretation. Disadvantages:1. It creates loopholes in the law. 2. It might lead to an absurd
result. 3. The rule can result in injustice. CriticismThis rule assumes that words used in law
have a fixed meaning. Words, in fact, are imprecise and their meaning can change over time.
To,

The Secretary,

HCLSC,

P&H High Court, Chandigarh

Subject : Recusal from / Return of allocated matter bearing No.

Sir,

In reference to aforementioned captioned subject, undersigned due to peculiar

personal reasons & regressive circumstances beyond control, is recusing from the instant

matter, accordingly is returning the entire documents.

Thanking you,

Yours
To,

The Secretary,

HCLSC,

P&H High Court, Chandigarh

Subject : Recusal from / Return of allocated matter bearing No.

Sir,

In reference to aforementioned captioned subject, undersigned 'due to

unbecoming & regressive misconduct of legal aid beneficiary', is recusing from the instant

matter, accordingly is returning the entire documents.

Thanking you,

Yours