Table of Constants

Topic Page Number

Abstract 1
Introduction 1
Importance of Interpretation of 1-2
Statutes in Ensuring Justice
The grounds for statutory 2-3
interpretation
Judiciary in Bangladesh 3
The Rules of Statutory 3-4
Interpretation
Need for Statutory Interpretation 4
Conclusion 5
References 6

0
Abstract:
Interpretation of law plays an important role in ensuring justice in Bangladesh. The Supreme
Court of Bangladesh, as the guardian of the Constitution, is responsible for upholding the rule of
law in the country and interpreting statutes to promote justice. In Bangladesh, the interpretation
of statutes is governed by various principles and rules. An important principle is that laws must
be interpreted in their proper context. Words and provisions have their meaning in relation to the
context in which they are used, and each section should be understood in relation to the other
sections and the overall purpose of the Act. Moreover, there are certain presumptions and
guidelines that assist judges in their interpretation of the law. For example, statutes enacted by
legislatures are presumed to be valid and courts try to interpret them in a way that conforms to
legislative intent. It ensures that laws are applied fairly and consistently.

Introduction:
Interpretation of law plays an important role in ensuring justice in any legal system. In the
context of Bangladesh, interpretation of statutes is crucial to uphold the constitution and protect
the rights of citizens. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh is responsible for protecting and
upholding the Constitution, making it the guardian of justice in the country. Statutory
interpretation involves the process of interpreting and applying the meaning of laws enacted by
the legislature. Correct interpretation of the law is essential for judges to ensure justice. In
addition to the three main rules associated with the interpretation of statutes, there are other rules
and assumptions that assist judges in their work. These rules include considering the context of
the words used in the statute and interpreting each section.

Importance of Interpretation of Statutes in Ensuring

Justice:
Interpretation of statutes is very important to ensure justice in Bangladesh. It helps clarify the
meaning and intent of laws, resolve ambiguities, and ensure consistency in their application.
Here are some key points highlighting the importance of interpretation of law in ensuring justice:
 Protection of Constitutional Rights the Supreme Court of Bangladesh plays an important
role in the interpretation of statutes to protect and uphold the Constitution. It ensures that
the fundamental rights of citizens are protected.

 Access to Justice Interpretation of laws helps ensure easy access to justice for all citizens.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes are incorporated in civil matters in
Bangladesh to provide fair and efficient resolution of disputes. ADR ensures that justice
is accessible to individuals without lengthy court proceedings.

1
  Rule of Law Statutory interpretation is essential to uphold the rule of law in Bangladesh.
It helps clarify the provisions of the Constitution and ensure their implementation.
Judiciary plays an important role in interpreting laws and ensuring their compliance.

 Legal Aid and Equality Interpretation of laws is important to ensure legal aid services and
equality before the law. It helps to address gaps, loopholes and complexities in existing
laws related to legal aid services. It ensures that the weaker sectors of society have access
to justice and can enjoy their basic human rights.

 Precedents and Judicial Independence Interpretation of statutes by Bangladeshi courts has

provided important judicial precedents, particularly in constitutional law. Precedents set
by courts help guide future interpretations and ensure consistency in the application of
laws. Judicial independence is also ensured through the interpretation of laws.

The grounds for statutory interpretation:

Statutory interpretation refers to the process by which courts examine a statute and determine its
meaning and application. When interpreting statutes, judges may encounter ambiguities or
uncertainties in the wording of statutes. Here are some bases for statutory interpretation:
 Plain Meaning In some cases, the words of a statute may have a plain and straightforward
meaning that can be applied directly. Judges often begin by looking at the ordinary
meaning of the statutory text to determine its interpretation.

 Ambiguity Many statutes contain ambiguous language that requires interpretation. When
the plain meaning of the words is not clear, judges use various tools and methods to
resolve the ambiguity and determine the intended meaning of the statute.

 Legislative Intent To understand the purpose and intent behind a statute, judges may
examine legislative history, including committee reports, floor debates, and other
documents related to the law's enactment. This helps in determining the original intent of
the legislature.

 Context and Structure Judges interpret specific provisions of a statute by considering the
broader statutory context. They analyze how different sections of the law relate to each
other and interpret provisions considering the overall structure and purpose of the statute.

2
  Canons of Interpretation Canons of interpretation are general principles or rules that
guide judges in interpreting statutes. These canons provide guidance on how to resolve
ambiguities and apply the law. Examples of canons include the literal rule, the golden
rule, the mischief rule, and the purposive approach.

Judiciary in Bangladesh:
The judiciary of Bangladesh relies on precedents to guide its decisions. However, conflicting
Interpretation in retrospect may create confusion and undermine the harmony of the law
Conclusions Addressing this challenge requires a concise approach to distinguish between cases
and reconciling conflicting interpretations. Despite these challenges, statutory interpretation in
Bangladesh serves as a cornerstone Judgment. It reflects the judiciary's commitment to uphold
the rule of law and ensure justice Method of interpretation of law. Strict construction policy,
where rules are in place Interpreted in favor of individual rights, more emphasis is placed on
submission to the judiciary Protection of fundamental freedoms.

The Rules of Statutory Interpretation:

Statutory interpretation is effectively a matter for the courts. Under the Interpretation Act 1978,
Over time, several rules of statutory interpretation have been developed, providing an important
framework for interpretation. These are known as the Literal Rule, the Golden Rule, and the
Mischief Rule.
The literal rule Under the literal rule, the words in a statute are given their ordinary and natural
meaning. They will be read literally and do not need to be analyses further for different
meanings, disregarding the plain words of the legislation. An example of a plain reading
resulting in a harsh result is the Berriman case (1946) where a railway worker was killed while
doing some ‘oiling’ on a railway line because of there being no ‘look out’ point. The judge would
not grant Mrs. Berriman compensation for her husband’s death as the relevant Act only stated
that look out points had to be issued for workers ‘relaying’ or ‘repairing’ the line. Oiling did not
come within either of the two categories. This result was clearly harsh and unjust. To overcome
such outcomes, the Golden Rule was introduced to modify the literal rule.
The golden rule the golden rule is used to prevent inconsistency and absurdity when interpreting
an Act literally. It can be applied narrowly or widely. Under the narrow approach, the court “can
only choose between the possible meanings of a word, i.e. If one meaning is apparent that
meaning must be adopted. In Adler v George (1964), the defendant was charged under the
Official Secrets Act 1920, with obstruction “in the vicinity” of a prohibited area. Although the
defendant had carried out the obstruction inside the area, the court did not restrict itself to the
literal wording of the Act and found him guilty. Under the wider approach, the courts can modify

3
the words to avoid a problem, for instance, where there is an obvious and clear meaning, but this
meaning would lead to an absurd result. For instance, in Re Sigsworth (1935) the defendant had
murdered his mother. Under the relevant Act of Parliament, the next of kin would inherit the
deceased’s estate. Whilst this was clear, the literal rule would produce an unjust result. The
golden rule was applied, so that the next of kin would not inherit the estate where they had killed
the deceased.
The mischief rule Sometimes, statutes can be defined more broadly by the courts to deal with
unforeseen loopholes or ambiguity within the legislation, which may prevent parliament’s
original intention being honored. This application is known as the mischief rule and will be used
where there is ambiguity. The mischief rule was laid down in the landmark Haydon’s Case in
1584 where the court said four issues need to be considered when interpreting statutes. These
were to: examine the common law prior to the Act, locate the mischief or defeat in the common
law, identify the remedy Parliament meant to propose to eliminate the mischief, and finally, to
give effect to that remedy. The mischief rule is narrower than the golden rule and only applied to
determine the mischief and defect that the statute was intended to remedy.

Need for Statutory Interpretation:

Although the object of interpretation of all written instruments is the main one to find out
Intention of makers, principle of interpretation of statute and other non-statutory the instrument
is always the same. 12 Prerogatives of Parliament to make laws and its functions Judges must
apply that law. But judges must confirm the law before they can apply it, they often face
difficulties in interpreting the exact meaning of the law and in doing so. A kind of independence
or reservation of judges comes with this difficulty. There are some laws Their meaning is
ambiguous; Some may offend the judge's notion of substantive justice or Common sense. What
can judges do about it? The safest way he can take refuge The view is that Parliament knows
best, and courts can only take the words of a statute at their face value, though, the results are
absurd. Again, some judges argue that, in such cases, it is Go to court to repair the deficiency.
The most famous of these scenes is by the Modem Exposition Hall Lode Denning (Master of the
Rolls since 1962):

4
Conclusion:
he interpretation of statutes plays a vital role in ensuring justice from a Bangladesh perspective.
The Supreme Court of Bangladesh is charged with the duty to protect and uphold the
Constitution of Bangladesh, functioning as the guardian of justice. The interpretation of statutes
involves understanding the context, purpose, and intent of the legislation, as well as the
principles of justice, fairness, and equity. Interpretation of statutes allows for a flexible and
adaptable legal system that can address the evolving needs and circumstances of society. It helps
prevent potential gaps or inconsistencies in the law and ensures that the law is applied
consistently and fairly. By balancing the letter and spirit of the law, judges can uphold justice
even in situations where a literal interpretation may lead to unjust outcomes. In Bangladesh, the
interpretation of statutes has been significant in areas such as constitutional law, asserting the
separation of powers and judicial independence. The judiciary plays a crucial role in providing
judicial precedent and ensuring the rights of citizens, including access to justice. Overall, the
interpretation of statutes in Bangladesh is essential for upholding justice, promoting fairness, and
maintaining the rule of law within the legal system.

5
References:
https://nhrc.portal.gov.bd/
https://www.supremecourt.gov.bd/resources/contents/Speech
Case, Adler v George (1964)
Case, The Berriman case (1946)
Case, The landmark Haydon’s Case in 1584
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_interpretation