INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

UNIT 1

A. Meaning of Interpretation

The term interpretation means “To give meaning to”.

Interpretation is the act of finding out the true sense of any form of words, that is, the sense
which the author intended to convey, and of enabling others to derive from them the same
idea which the author intended to convey.

Interpretation of statutes is the correct understanding of the law. This process is commonly
adopted by the courts for determining the exact intention of the legislature. Because the
objective of the court is not only merely to read the law but is also to apply it in a meaningful
manner to suit from case to case. It is also used for ascertaining the actual connotation of any
Act or document with the actual intention of the legislature.

Definitions

 SALMOND:- By interpretation or construction is meant to the process by which the

courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislative through the medium of
authoritative form in which it is expressed.

Two Approaches

LITERAL CONTEXT
After reading Meaning is Meaning is not clear,
clear after reading.

 GREY:- Interpretation is the process by which the judge constructs from the word of
the statute book a meaning which he either believes to be that of a legislature or which
he prepares to be attributed to it.
CASE LAW:-
Sudena Naud V. State through CBI, 2012
Interpretation is always independent of the facts of any given case but application would
always be dependent on the exact facts of the case.
Interpretation V. Construction
Not in existence earlier

 Salmond:- He didn’t differ between the two.

 Only legal scholar COOLEY differs:- Interpretation is different from construction in
the sense that the former is the art of finding out the true sense of any form of words.
i.e., the sense which their author intended to convey & of enabling others to drive
from them the same idea which the author intended to convey. Construction on the
other hand, is the drawing of a conclusion respecting subjects that lie beyond the
direct expression of the text from elements known from & given in the text conclusion
which are in spirit through not within the letter of the law.

Vague Definition
 Crow Ford:- Distinction only for academic purposes only.
 Sutherland:- Criticised this distinction as erroneous.
 J. White:- In common usage interpretation & construction are usually understood as
having the same significance.

The intention of the Legislature

 Sole motive of interpretation
 Bill-debate- the importance of each word is presumed.
 Change in circumstances/ cannot force each & every situation / a word
may have more meaning.
 Judiciary is at the master of drafting law- SOP
 For proper application of law- need to interpret.
 The only criteria for proper interpretation is not to exceed jurisdiction.

Limitation of Judiciary
 First there should be vagueness/absurdity in the law, otherwise judiciary
cannot interfere.
 Interpretation means the intention of the legislature or legislature
becomes funtus officio. Thus court must apply laws. It gives more power
to the judiciary, as absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is why the
judges shouldn’t exceed their jurisdiction.
 Cannot travel beyond the 4 corners of law.
  Ex-legislature gave 16-18 age window for interpretation in the Juvenile
Justice act, to try the cases as minor/major.
 Literal/ Purposive approach

Mostly in welfare laws

 Definition of COOLEY,
Function of the court is “ JUS DICERE”- To declare/ expand the law.
They cannot “JUS DARE”- Give/Make the law.

LATIN MAXIMS:-
1. Ex Visceribus Actus

Meaning: - Latin Maxim

A statute should be read as a whole.
An important principle of interpretation is that the statute should be read as a whole. No
provision in statute and no words in a section should be construed in isolation. All parts of the
statute should be taken together.

CASE LAWS: -

 Ashwini Kumar V. Aurobindo Ghosh , 1952

The Supreme court held that to find out the true intention of legislature, it is necessary to take
all the parts of the statutes together interpreting any provision into it.

 State of Punjab V. OGB Syndicate Ltd., 1964

In considering, the true meaning of the words & exp. Used by the legislature judge must have
regard to the sim, objective & scope of the statute to be read in its entity.

 State of West Bengal Vs. Union of India, 1964

The Supreme Court observed that to determine the intent of the legislature, only particular
section of the statute not only see but whole statute should be read to determine true intention
and to discover the purposes of the legislature.

 Bhavnagar University Vs. Palitana Sugar Mills Pvt. Ltd., 2003

The Hon’ble Apex Court opined that one of the basic principles of the construction of the
statute is that it should be read as a whole, then chapter, section by section, and word by
word.
  K.B Nagpur Ayurveda V. UOI, 2012

2. UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PAREAT

Ut res magis valeat quam pereat is a Latin legal maxim that translates to “let the thing be
more valued than it perishes”. This principle is commonly applied in the interpretation of
statutes and legal documents.
In simple terms, ut res magis valeat quam pereat means that when interpreting laws or legal
provisions, courts should strive to give them a meaning that allows them to be effective and
operational rather than interpreting them in a way that renders them useless or void. This
means that when we read a law, we should try to understand it in a way that makes it do what
it’s supposed to do.
CASE LAWS:-

 Bhatia International V. Bulk Trading, SA, 2002

In selecting the true meaning regard must be have to the consequences resulting from
adopting the alternative construction.

 Avtar Singh V. State of Punjab, 1965

Section 38 of the Electricity Act 1910 Theft of electricity- Punishment as per IPC.

 UOI V. Elphinstone Spinning & weaving Co. Ltd.

In this case, There are 3 writ petitions which are combined in 1. Textile Undertaking taking
over management ordinance,1983 which was replaced by the act- 18th Jan 1982
nationalization of textile mills in Bombay & around went on strike- Feb 1982 nationalization
of textile mills there will be categorization as per financial condition Save Fundamental
rights of the workers who all are working in these textile mills.
Financial condition was unsatisfactory due to mismanagement.
Violation Article 14, 19(1)(g) Executive action not the act.
Ordinance invalid
To make at workable
Valid
 3. CASUS OMISSUS

Cases omitted

 Lord Denning:- When a defect appears judges cannot fold their hands and claim the
draftsman. They must work as a constructive part of the intention of the legislature &
then he must supplement the written words to give force and life to the legislation.
 Criticism:- Lord Simon:- Disappears interpretation by Denning. It appears to me to
be a naked reception of the legislative function of the twin disguise of interpretation.
 But they work within the 4 corners of the law.
 SOP- Supplement each other to achieve the goal of govt.

CASE LAW:-

 Paramsundra Rao V. State of Tamil Nadu, 2002:-

Constitutional Bench- A CASUS OMISSUS cannot be supplied by the court except in the care
of clear necessity & when reasons for it are found in the 4 corners of the statute. But at the
same time, a casus omissus should not be readily inferred.

 Balji Nagar Residential Association V. State of Tamil Nadu &ors, 2015:-

Right to fair compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Settlement
Act, 2013. Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894(Award given). 2013 Act was
Modified & held that any award given before 5 years or more coming into force of the 2013
act & no possession has been taken and also no compensation will be given. It will be
deemed that the award has lapsed.
Cases where the matters are pending before the court will also be dealt with under the 2013
statute & they cannot Casus omissus- Case omitted cannot be inferred, there must be
necessity.
 UNIT 4

RULE OF INTERPRETATION

PRIMARY RULES SECONDARY RULES

LITERAL GOLDEN MISCHIEF

RULE RULE RULE

 PROCESS OF INTERPRETATION:-
AUSTIN:- Includes 3 things:-(1) Finding the rule of interpretation.
(2) Finding the intention of the legislative assembly.
(3) Extending or outstanding the statutes.
 DE SOOLEVERE:- (1) Finding the proper statutory provisions.
(2) Interpreting the statute of law in its technical.
(3) Applying the meaning so found to ease the case.
 Rules of interpretation are the various types of reading the statute:-
 Literal Approach
 Purposive Approach

 PATON & ODGENS

1. Literal Rule:- It is the rule that if the meaning of a section is plain, it is to be applied
whatever the result.
2. Golden Rule:- It is the rule that the words should be given their ordinary sense unless
that would lead to some absurdity or inconsistency with the risk of the instrument.
3. Mischief Rule:- It is the rule that emphasizes the general policy of the statute & the
evil act to which it was directed.
A. LITERAL RULE OF INTERPRETATION

 It is the primary rule of interpretation that says that the intention of the legislative
must be found in the words used by the legislature itself. The legislature must be
deemed to have intended what it has said.
 Literal Rule is also known as the plain meaning rule.
 The words used in the act are to be given or interpreted in their natural or ordinary
meaning.
 To give the natural and ordinary meaning.
 If the words are clear, they must be applied, even though the intention of the
legislature may have been different.
 “The literal rule is what the law says instead of what the law means”
 For determination of the meaning of any word or phrase in a statute, where
complexity and uncertainty arise.
 It can be understood by these Conditions:-
A statute may itself provide a special meaning for a term, which is usually to be
found in the interpretation section.
Technical words are given ordinary technical meaning if the statute has not
specified any other.

CASE LAWS:-

 Grawford V. Spooney, 1846:-

The words of the statute are first understood in their ordinary, natural, or popular sense
unless that leads to some absurdity.

 Mahadev lal kanotiya V. Administration General of West Bengal, 1960:-

The intention of the legislature has always been to be gathered by words used by it giving
words their plain, normal & grammatical meaning.

 Mangalore Ganesh Bidi factories workers Association V. State of Karnataka

 AP Hotels Association V. State of AP

LITERAL LAW
 Ramvakar Budhai Prasad V. Association S.T.O, 1962 ( BETAL LEAVES)

CP & MP Verar sales tax act, 1947 (item no. 6 of schedule)

ISSUE Whether Betel Leaves exempted or not from tax?
Betel Leaves (treated as vegetables) Item no. 36 ( after amendment removed)
It is observed that betel leaves both the terms are not defined in the act. So, the judges first
interpret the literal rule of interpretation. The common parlance meaning is to be taken.
Vegetables are understood as commonly as those classes of vegetable matter which are grown
in kitchen garden & are used for the table.
Betel leaves are not food stuff and not used for the table.

 M/S Motipur zamindari co. Pvt. Ltd. V. State pf bihar, 1962 (SUGARCANE)

Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1947 Section 6 Tax on sugarcane

ISSUE Whether the sugarcane is a vegetable or not?
If it falls under green vegetables Then exempted
It was held by the court that the common parlance meaning of the statute to be taken.

 State of West Bengal V. Wasi Ahmed ( Ginger Case)

It deals with the Bengal Finance Sales Tax Act, 1941.

Item no. 6 of the schedule-1 (Exemption) using the word vegetable, green, or dried ( Sabzi,
Tarkari, Saag)
Common parlance meaning is to be taken.
ISSUE Whether ginger can be included in the statute.
The court observed that we should refer to the technical meaning. Ginger is used in food &
can be used as green as well as dried.
Supreme court observed that ginger is available with vegetable vendors for the railway tariff,
and ginger is included in the vegetable.
Even the corporation of Calcutta included ginger in the list of vegetables of the price of
vegetables. By applying these three interpretations, ginger is to be taken as vegetable &
hence, sales tax doesn’t apply.
 B. GOLDEN RULE
It is known as the golden rule because it solves all the problems of interpretation.
Ordinarily, the court must find out the intention of the legislature from the words used in the
statute by giving them their natural meaning. But when there is any absurdity while
interpreting any provision of a statute, than the golden rule works. It respects the words of the
parliaments and it allows the judge to use most sensible meaning.

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 can 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. 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:-

  What seems to be absurd to one judge may not be to another.
 It is very limited and it is used in rare cases only.
 There are no real guidelines, when it can be used.

C. MISCHIEF RULE

The mischief rule focuses on determining the intention of lawmakers during the interpretation
of statutes. It originated in the United Kingdom in the 16th century and was established in
Heydon’s case.

It was held that the primary aim of interpreting a statute should be to identify the “mischief
and defect” that the statute intended to address and provide an effective remedy. This rule
seeks to answer the question of what problem the previous law failed to cover, leading to the
enactment of the statute in question.

Heydon’s Case (1584) 3 CO REP outlined four points to be considered when interpreting a
statute:

 What was the common law before the enactment of the statute?
 What was the “mischief and defect” that the common law did not address?
 What remedy did the parliament intend to provide to rectify the problem?
 What is the true reason behind the remedy?
The use of this rule allows judges more flexibility in determining the lawmakers’ intent,
rather than being strictly bound by the literal and golden rules of interpretation.

However, this rule has been criticised because it introduces uncertainty into the law and
grants excessive power to unelected judges, which is seen as undemocratic. Moreover, it is
considered outdated as the common law is no longer the primary source of law.

CASE LAWS:-
 Smith V. Huges,1960:-
In this case around the 1960s, the prostitutes were soliciting in the streets of London and it was
creating a huge problem in London. This was causing a great problem in maintaining law and order.
To prevent this problem, Street Offences Act, 1959 was enacted. After the enactment of this act, the
prostitutes started soliciting from windows and balconies.
Further, the prostitutes who were carrying on to solicit from the streets and balconies were charged
under section 1(1) of the said Act. But the prostitutes pleaded that they were not solicited from the
streets.
The court held that although they were not soliciting from the streets the mischief rule must be
applied to prevent the soliciting by prostitutes and shall look into this issue. Thus, by applying this
rule, the court held that the windows and balconies were taken to be an extension of the word street
and the charge sheet was held to be correct.

 Pyare lal V. Ram Chandra:-

The accused in this case, was prosecuted for selling the sweeten supari which was sweetened with the
help of an artificial sweetener. He was prosecuted under the Food Adulteration Act. It was contended
by Pyare Lal that supari is not a food item.

The court held that the dictionary meaning is not always the correct meaning, thereby, the mischief
rule must be applicable, and the interpretation which advances the remedy shall be taken into
consideration.

Therefore, the court held that the word ‘food’ is consumable by mouth and orally. Thus, his
prosecution was held to be valid.

 RMDC V. UOI

Prize competition act

Violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Indian constitution.
Mischief rule applied.

 Alamgir V. State of Bihar

Section 498 IPC

Takeaway or entice women without intercourse with others.
The mischief rule will apply to Women living with other persons of their own free will.

 Subramaniam V. State of A.P.

Section 498 of IPC, section 482 of CrPC and the dowry prohibition act
The purpose of the law is to eradicate dowry
Marriage- A question of fact
Couple staying like a husband and wife.
Marriage was invalid due to prohibited degrees.
Section 16 of the Hindu marriage act was referred.

D. LEGAL FICTION
 Specific in nature

Legal fiction is defined as:-

 A legal assumption that a thing is true which is either not true, or which is probably
false.
 An assumption of law that something false is true.
 A state of facts exists which has never really existed. A legal fiction is a device by
which the law deliberately departs from the truth of things for some reason.
 E.g. A foreigner was treated to be a Roman citizen for jurisdiction. Legal fiction is
treated in the provisions of enactment by using the term “is deemed”. The deeming
provision is to assume the existence of fact does not exist.

CASE LAWS:-

 Gajraj Singh & ors. V. State TPT Appellate Tribunal

Supreme Court defined legal fiction in this case. Legal fiction is not an actual reality but
within the law recognized and the court accepts as a reality.
Judges will assume:- (For legal fiction)
 To ascertain for what purpose the fiction is created.
 To assume all those facts & consequences which are incidental & or
inevitable corollaries to the given effect of fiction.

 Indira Sahani V. UOI, 1999

SC observed that the legislature is quite competent to create to assume the existence of the
facts which don’t exist provided the declaration of non-existent facts as existing doesn’t
offend the constitution.
Pratap Singh V. State of Jharkhand,2005
The court is interpreting the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 & 200 were impugned.

The court dealt with the difference between

1986 2000
Males18 Age of Majority
Females16

 Bijender Singh V. State of Haryana, 2005

( Relationship like marriage)

E. Ejusdem Generis

Ejusdem generis is a Latin legal principle that means of the same kind or the same nature. In
the context of legal interpretation, this principle is used to interpret ambiguous or general
words in a statute or contract based on the specific words or phrases that precede them.
For example, if a contract clause states that employees are prohibited from bringing animals,
including dogs, cats, and other animals into the workplace and the term other animals is
ambiguous, ejusdem generis would suggest that other animals should be interpreted to be of
the same kind as the specific animals mentioned (i.e., pets) and it would not include, for
instance, farm animals or exotic wildlife.