1.

BENEFICIAL AND HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION

These are basic rules of Interpretation of law. They follow the principle of statute shall be
read as a whole and should confer benefits to the people

Interpretation means the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words of
the enactment their natural and ordinary meaning. It is the process of ascertaining the true
meaning of the words used in a statute. The Court is not expected to interpret arbitrarily and
therefore there have been certain principles which have evolved out of the continuous exercise
by the Courts. These principles are sometimes called ‘rules of interpretation’. The object of
interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or
impliedly in the language used. As stated by SALMOND, "by interpretation or construction is
meant, the process by which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through
the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed."

What we speak or write are the means of communication. No problem arises when the words are
of single meaning, but those with plural meanings require the basic intend of the conveyor to be
understood. If two people conversing with each other, surely whatever be the uncertainty in the
language will be resorted at the same time. Let us suppose we discovered a letter written by a
soldier during World War I, to his wife, there will definitely be some words inconsistent with the
others and will be delivering more than one meaning. The best way to understand the real
meaning is to have a logical interpretation of his mind and the conditions that affected his writing
of the letter which will deliver the real intend of the writer. All that we can do is to solve the
mystery by our self as the soldier is not there to make us understand the whole meaning of the
letter; the same is the case with our judiciary as they by their own intellect have to interpret the
statutes made by the legislators. In most circumstances the language of the statute has a plain,
simple and to the point meaning. Interpretation becomes more important when it comes to
uncertain and repugnant provisions of the statues.

The reason for ambiguity of legislation is the basic nature of language. It is not always possible
to accurately convert the real intend of the legislation into written words. The versatility of
language inevitably means that there will often be equally good or equally unconvincing
arguments for two competing interpretation. There are at times the provisions having more than
one meaning or the ambiguity in the language. The legislature becomes functus officio after
enacting the statues. The interpreters cannot go back to the legislature and ask for the exact
meaning of the statute as the legislators would not have assumed such a wide variety of
conditions while making of any particular statute.

Thus it is totally on the Judges to interpret such provisions so that both are effective. To avoid
further ambiguities legislation has provided us with the primary rules of interpretations. Here
only two of the rules will be discussed and a reasonable comparison shall be drawn out between
them. Harmonious Construction and Beneficial Construction are the two rules to be discussed as
a concept and shall be compared with each other as per usages of the same and on different
heads.

Interpretation And Construction

Interpretation is the method by which true sense or the meaning of the word is understood. The
meaning of an ordinary meaning of an English word is not a question of law. According to Gray,
the process by which a judge constructs from the words of a statute book, a meaning which he
either believes to be that of the legislature, or which, he proposes to attribute to it is
interpretation. Salmond describes interpretation as the process which the courts seek to ascertain
the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is
expressed.

Rule of Harmonious Construction

When there is a conflict between two or more statues or two or more parts of a statute then the
rule of harmonious construction needs to be adopted. The rule follows a very simple premise that
every statute has a purpose and intent as per law and should be read as a whole. The
interpretation consistent of all the provisions of the statute should be adopted. In the case in
which it shall be impossible to harmonize both the provisions, the court’s decision regarding the
provision shall prevail.

The rule of harmonious construction is the thumb rule to interpretation of any statute. An
interpretation which makes the enactment a consistent whole, should be the aim of the Courts
and a construction which avoids inconsistency or repugnancy between the various sections or
parts of the statute should be adopted. The Courts should avoid “a head on clash”, in the words
of the Apex Court, between the different parts of an enactment and conflict between the various
provisions should be sought to be harmonized. The normal presumption should be consistency
and it should not be assumed that what is given with one hand by the legislature is sought to be
taken away by the other. The rule of harmonious construction has been tersely explained by the
Supreme Court thus, “When there are, in an enactment two provisions which cannot be
reconciled with each other, they should be so interpreted, that if possible, effect should be given
to both”. A construction which makes one portion of the enactment a dead letter should be
avoided since harmonization is not equivalent to destruction.

Harmonious Construction should be applied to statutory rules and courts should avoid absurd or
unintended results. It should be resorted to making the provision meaningful in the context. It
should be in consonance with the intention of Rule makers. Rule of Harmonious construction is
applicable to subordinate legislature also.
The Supreme Court laid down five principles of rule of Harmonious Construction in the
landmark case of CIT v Hindustan Bulk Carriers:

1. The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must
construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them.

2. The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another
unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences. When
it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the courts
must interpret them in such as way so that effect is given to both the provisions as much as
possible.

3. Courts must also keep in mind that interpretation that reduces one provision to a useless
number or dead is not harmonious construction.

To harmonize is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it fruitless.

Cases on Harmonious Construction

1. Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore

In this case the Supreme Court applied the rule of harmonious construction in resolving a
conflict between Articles 25(2)(b) and 26(b) of the Constitution and it was held that the right of
every religious denomination or any section thereof to manage its own affairs in matters of
religion [Article 26(b)] is subject to a law made by a State providing for social welfare and
reform or throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and
sections of Hindus [Article 25(2)(b)].

2. Calcutta Gas Company Pvt. Limited v State of West Bengal

The Legislative Assembly of WB passed the Oriental Gas Company Act in 1960. The respondent
sought to take over the management of the Gas Company under this Act. The appellant
challenged the validity of this act by holding that the state Legislative Assembly had no power to
pass such an under Entries 24 and 25 of the State List because the Parliament had already
enacted the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 under Entry 52 of the Central
List dealing with industries. It was observed by the Supreme Court that there are so many
subjects in three lists in the Constitution that there is bound to be some overlapping and it is the
duty of the courts in such situation is to yet to harmonise them, if possible, so the effect can be
given to each of them. Entry 24 of the State List covers entire Industries in the State. Entry 25 is
only limited to the Gas industry. Therefore Entry 24 covers every industry barring the Gas
Industries because it has been specifically covered under Entry 25. Corresponding to Entry 24 of
the State List, there is Entry 52 in the Union List. Therefore, by harmonious construction it
became clear that gas industry was exclusively covered by Entry 25 of the State List over which
the state has full control. Therefore, the state was fully competent to make laws in this regard.

3. Commissioner of Sales Tax, MP v Radha Krishna

Under section 46 (1) c of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, criminal prosecution
of the respondent partners was sanctioned in this case by the Commissioner when even after
repeated demands the assesse did not pay the sales tax. The respondent challenged this provision
on the ground that there were two separate provisions under the Act, namely, section 22 (4 – A)
and section 46 (1) c under which two different procedures were prescribed to realize the amount
due but there was no provision of law which could tell that which provision should be applied in
which case. According to the Supreme Court, the provision prescribed u/s 46 (1) c was more
drastic. It was held that by harmonious construction of these two provisions, the conclusion
drawn is that the Commissioner had a judicial discretion to decide as to which procedure to be
followed in which case. Whenever the Commissioner will fail to act judicially, the court will
have the right to intervene. However, in this case, the Commissioner had correctly decided that
the more drastic procedure under section 46 (1) c deserved to be followed because of the failure
of the assesse firm in paying sales tax despite the repeated demands by the sales tax officer.

4. Sirsilk Ltd. v Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

An interesting question relating to a conflict between two equally mandatory provisions, viz., ss
17(1) and 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is a good illustration of the importance of
the principle that every effort should be made to give effect to all the provisions of an act by
harmonizing any apparent conflict between two or more of its provisions. Section 17(1) of the
Act requires the government to publish every award of a Labour Tribunal within thirty days of its
receipt and by sub – section (2) of section 17 the award on its publication becomes final. Section
18(1) of the Act provides that a settlement between employer and workmen shall be binding on
the parties to the agreement. In a case where a settlement was arrived at after the receipt of the
award of a Labour Tribunal by the Government but before its publication, the question was
whether the Government was still required u/s 17(1) to publish the award. In construing these
two equally mandatory provisions, the Supreme Court held that the only way to resolve the
conflict was to hold that by the settlement, which becomes effective from the date of signing, the
industrial dispute comes to an end and the award becomes infructuous and the Government
cannot publish it.

Rule of Beneficial Construction

Beneficent construction involves giving the widest meaning possible to the statutes. When there
are two or more possible ways of interpreting a section or a word, the meaning which gives relief
and protects the benefits which are purported to be given by the legislation, should be chosen. A
beneficial statute has to be construed in its correct perspective so as to fructify the legislative
intent. Although beneficial legislation does receive liberal interpretation, the courts try to remain
within the scheme and not extend the benefit to those not covered by the scheme. It is also true
that once the provision envisages the conferment of benefit limited in point of time and subject to
the fulfillment of certain conditions, their non-compliance will have the effect of nullifying the
benefit. There should be due stress and emphasis to Directive Principles of State Policy and any
international convention on the subject.

There is no set principle of construction that a beneficial legislation should always be

retrospectively operated although such legislation such legislation is either expressly or by
necessary intendment not made retrospective. Further, the rule of interpretation can only be
resorted to without doing any violence to the language of the statute. In case of any exception
when the implementation of the beneficent act is restricted the Court would construe it narrowly
so as not to unduly expand the area or scope of exception. The liberal construction can only flow
from the language of the act and there cannot be placing of unnatural interpretation on the words
contained in the enactment. Also, beneficial construction does not permit rising of any
presumption that protection of widest amplitude must be deemed to have been conferred on those
for whose benefit the legislation may have been enacted.

Beneficial Construction of statutes have enormously played an important role in the development
and beneficial interpretation of socio – economic legislations and have always encouraged the
Indian legislators to make more laws in favour of the backward class of people in India.

Beneficial Construction in Socio – Economic legislations

Socio-economic legislation which is aimed at social or economic policy changes, the

interpretation should not be narrow. Justice Krishna Iyer in a case relating to agrarian reforms
observed that “the judiciary is not a mere umpire but also an active catalyst in the constitutional
scheme”.

In the case of Sant Ram v Rajinderlal, the Supreme Court said that welfare legislation must be
interpreted in a third World perspective favoring the weaker and poor class. It has also been laid
down in the case of labor legislation that courts should not stick to grammatical constructions but
also have regard to ‘teleological purpose and protective intendment of the legislation.
Interpretation of labor legislations should be done by the courts with more concern with the
colour, the context and the content of the statute rather than its literal import.

Industrial Disputes Act 1947 is one of welfare statute which intends to bring about peace and
harmony between management and labour in an industry and improve the service conditions of
industrial workers which in will turn accelerate productive activity of the country resulting in its
prosperity. As a result the prosperity of the country in turn will help to improve the conditions of
the workmen. Therefore this statute should be interpreted in such a way that it advances the
object and the purpose of the legislation and gives it a full meaning and effect so that the ultimate
social objective is achieved. The courts while interpreting labour laws have always stressed on
the doctrine of social justice as enshrined in the Preamble of Constitution.

Beneficial Construction – A tendency rather than a rule

It is said by Maxwell, that Beneficial Construction is a tendency and not a rule. The reason is that
this principle is based on human tendency to be fair, accommodating, and just. Instead of
restricting the people from getting the benefit of the statute, Court tends to include as many
classes as it can while remaining faithful to the wordings of the statute. For example, in the case
of Alembic Chemical Works v Workman, an industrial tribunal awarded more number of paid
leaves to the workers than what Section 79(1) of Factories Act recommended. This was
challenged by the appellant. SC held that the enactment being welfare legislation for the workers,
it had to be beneficially constructed in the favor of worker and thus, if the words are capable of
two meanings, the one that gives benefit to the workers must be used.

When a statute is meant for the benefit of a specific class, and if a word in the statute is capable
of two meanings, one which would preserve the benefits and one which would not, then the
meaning that would preserve the benefits must be adopted and shall be followed by the court of
law. It is important to note that omissions will not be supplied by the court. Only when multiple
meanings are possible, can the court shall pick the beneficial one. Thus, where the court has to
choose between a wider mean that carries out the objective of the legislature better and a narrow
meaning, then it usually chooses the former meaning carrying out the objective of the legislation.
Similarly, when the language used by the legislature fails to achieve the objective of a statute, an
extended meaning could be given to it to achieve that objective, if the language is fairly
susceptible to the extended meaning.

Limitation On The Application Of Beneficial Construction

If on the application of the rule of beneficial construction, the court finds that it is doing
complete justice and delivering a fair judgment then there is no question of why should not such
rule is applied? But there are certain restrictions which the court has to take care of which at the
time of application have to be adhered to –

1. Where the courts find that by the application of the rule of beneficial construction, it would be
re legislating a provision of statute either by substituting, adding or altering any provision of the
act.

2. Where any word in a statute confers to a single meaning only. Then the courts should refrain
from applying the rule of benevolent construction to the statute.

3. When there is no ambiguity in a provision of a statute so construed. If the provision is plain,

unambiguous and does not give rise to any doubt, the rule of beneficial construction cannot be
applied.

Conclusion
The conclusion shall be the final analysis of the comparison between the rule of Harmonious
Construction and rule of Beneficial Construction. Harmonious construction is only applied where
there are a conflict between the meaning coming out of two different sections and the meaning
land the courts in dubious situation of which section to apply? Whereas, the rule of Beneficial
Construction is applied in the cases where any construction may do any benefit to the society or
any group of people and are basically applied in the socio – economic legislations. Here there is
no conflict between the meanings of any two sections and meanings attributed to them.

2. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AIDS

1. What is interpretation of statutes?
Interpretation is the process which is employed by the judiciary to ascertain or to
determine the meaning of the statutes or legal provision. It is basically a process by which
court seeks to ascertain the true meaning of the expression or word or phrase which is in
question in any statute before the court and determine the true intention of the legislature
behind such statutory provision.

A process of interpretation employed by the judiciary can be done through various tools
or principles of statutory interpretation which include seeking help from internal or
external aids to interpretation and applying primary or secondary rule of interpretation
which has evolved over a period of time by the court.

According to Salmond:
Interpretation and construction is the process by which the court seek to ascertain the
meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is
expressed.[1]

According to Blackstone:
The most fair and rational method for interpreting a statute is by exploring the intention
of the legislature through texts, the subject matter, the effect and consequences or the
spirit and reason of law.[2]

2. What is construction of statutes?

Construction, in strict sense, is the process by which the court assign the meaning to the
ambiguous provision which is beyond the letter of law for the purpose to resolve the
inconsistency. The judges after taking into consideration the factual circumstances before
the court give a particular meaning to the expression or word or phrase in question.
Although, such meaning must be within the ambit of the objective of statute and could
not be directly explained by the statute.
The word interpretation and construction are used interchangeably but there is thin line of
difference between both the concepts.

According to Cooley, �Interpretation is the art of finding out the true sense of any form
of words and enabling others to drive from them the same meaning which the author
intended to convey, whereas, construction is the process of drawing conclusions,
respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct expression of the text, which are in the spirit
though not within the letter of law.[3]

Basically, interpretation is a process of discovering, from permissible data, the meaning

and intension of the legislature and if interpretation discloses clear meaning and intention
of the legislature it will be directly applied to factual circumstances but if interpretation
doesn't disclose clearly the meaning in context of factual circumstances, then construction
will undergoes to seek to assign meaning or intention to the words used by the legislature.
[4] It is clearly drawn that construction is more concerned with applying the meaning to
the factual circumstances than mere ascertaining the meaning of the words of provision.

Tabular difference between interpretation and construction

Interpretation Construction

It is the process by which court

assign the meaning to the
It is the process adopted by the court
ambiguous provision which is
1 to determine the true meaning of the
beyond the letter of law for the
legislative provision.
purpose to resolve the
inconsistency.

By construction one can find out

By interpretation one can find out the
the way to apply the meaning to
2 true sense of any form of words in
the factual circumstances before
statue.�
court.

Construction is more concerned

Interpretation enables the linguistic
3 in enabling conclusion to the
meaning of the legal text.
situation.
 3. Aids to interpretation of statutes
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:
1. 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.
�
2. 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.

State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali [5], 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.
�
3. 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 constitution many times marginal notes are referred because
they are made by constituent assembly.

Bengal Immunity Company v. State of Bihar [6], 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.
�
4. 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. Giddings [7], 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.
�
5. 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.

�
6. 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.

Example- section 108 of IPC defines the word abettor' which has five explanation attach
to it.
�
7. 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 [8], 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.
�
8. 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.
�
9. 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.
�
10. Saving Clause
Saving Clause are generally appended in cases of repeal and reenactment of a new
statute. It is inserted in the repealing statute.
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.
�
11. 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 [9].
�
12. 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.

Difference between proviso and exceptions

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:
1. 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 [10], the question was
whether sales tax can be levied on Sugarcane.

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.
�
2. 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 case [11], judges quoted large number of books.
�
3. 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.
4. 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 [12], 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.
�
5. 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.
�
6. 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.
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.
�
7. 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.
Example: in Right to Privacy case, judges refer to foreign judgements.

3. PENAL STATUTE
Penal Statute
Any statute which imposes a penal liability on a person who is found to be guilty of any
offence according to the provision of the statute is said to be a penal statute. Thus the
essential ingredient is punishing certain acts or wrongs. The word penal denotes some
kind of punishment awarded to an individual by the mandate of the state. Some instances
of such statutes are the Indian Penal Code,1860, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988,
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act,1954 etc.

The penalty for the disobedience of the law may be in the form of fine, forfeiture of
property, imprisonment and even death. Where obedience to law is enforced not by an
individual action but by a command of the law in the form of punishment, the statute is
penal. A penalty can be imposed only when the letter of the law says so unambiguously
and any doubt has to be resolved in favour of the alleged offender.

Strict Interpretation Of Penal Statute

While constructing a provision in a penal statute if there appears to be a reasonable doubt
or ambiguity, it shall be resolves in favour of the person who would be liable to penalty.
If a penal provision rationally be interpreted in such a way that punishment can be
avoided, it must be construed in that way only.

However if a given provision is capable of two reasonable interpretation of a penal

provision, the one which is more lenient should be considered. Punishment can be meted
out to a person only if the plain word of the penal provision without any extension of
meaning have the ability to bring that person under its purview. While interpreting the
statute strictly the spirit of the statute is not taken into consideration, hence a penalty
cannot be imposed on the basis that the object of a statute so desired.

According to Maxwell, the strict construction of Penal Statutes manifests itself in

following ways: [1]
In the requirement 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;
In insisting on the strict observance of technical provisions concerning criminal
procedure and jurisdiction.

Unless and until the words given in a statute give a clear indication of the act made
criminal, it shall not be interpreted as criminal. It is the duty of the court to inflict
punishment on a person only when the circumstances of a case unambiguously fall under
the letter if the law. All the legislations which deal with the jurisdiction and procedure
with regards to imposition of penalties should be interpreted and construed strictly.

It is the foremost duty of the Court to see that all the procedural requirements given in a
statute with respect to punishments in a statute are duly complied with before sentencing
the accused. In case of any doubt in such cases, the benefit of doubt goes to the accused.
Such a benefit can go upto the extent of acquitting the accused on the grounds of
technicality of the statute.

Penal statutes follow the principle of prospective operation. Prospective operation states
that, 'If there is a reasonable interpretation by which a penalty can be avoided, that
 interpretation should be accepted.' And in cases where a provision can be reasonably
interpreted in various ways, that specific interpretation must be avoided which causes
hardship or injustice.

Thus during the interpretation of it penal statute it must be carefully looked upon that
punishment or penalty could be imposed if and only if the conduct of he accused falls
clearly within the letter of the law.

An enactment entailing penal consequences does in no case permit violence with the
language used so as to bring it within the express words of the Act. Though it is true that,
a penal statute must never be so construed as to narrow down its words to exclude such
cases as would ordinarily be within its ambit.

Motibai v/s R. Prasad (1970)[2]

It was stated that Court should not try to add new words on its own, while interpreting a
Penal statute. Courts are required to do Grammatical Interpretation of Penal Statutes.

Spicer v/s Holt (1976)[3]

The Court made it clear that if in a penal statute a loophole is found, it is not for the
judges to cure it, for it is dangerous to derogate from the principle that a citizen has a
right to claim that howsoever much his conduct may seem to deserve punishment, he
should not be convicted unless that the conduct falls fairly within the definition of crime
of which he is charged.

4. MATERNITY CASE

B. Shah vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore and others.– The
Supreme Court was asked whether Sundays, which are wage-less holidays, could be
excluded while calculating maternity benefits for the period covered by Section 5. The
Apex Court in holding that Sundays must also be included, applied the beneficial rule
of construction in favour of the woman worker and observed that the benefit conferred
by the Act read in the light of the Article 42 of the Constitution was intended to enable
the woman worker not only to subsist but also to make up her dissipated energy, nurse
her child, preserve her efficiency as a worker and maintain the level of her previous
efficiency and output. She is unable to work during this time and requires additional
funds to cover her medical expenditures. The law provides for maternity benefits to
enable the woman worker to survive and maintain her health throughout this time,
enabling her to perform her productive and reproductive tasks effectively.

5. BEETLE LEAVES CASE

In Ramavtar v. Assistant Sales Tax officer,{2) the question before the court was
whether betel leaves are vegetables and, therefore, exempt from imposition of sales tax
under the central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947 as amended by Act 16 of
1948. The dictionary meaning of ‘vegetable’ was sought to be relied on wherein it has
been defined as pertaining to, comprised or consisting of or derived or obtained from
plants or their parts.