CHAPTER | INTRODUCTION SYNOPSIS WHAT IS LAW ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF LAW, NATURE, OBJECT AND FUNCTION OF LAW SOURCES OF LAW KINDS OF LAW, THREE ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION PROCESS OF LEGISLATION ENACTED LAW OR STATUTE LAW, SUPREME AND SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION MORALS AND LAW CHAPTER SUMMARY WHAT IS LAW It is not easy to give a perfect definition of law. There are many difficulties in properly defining the law. Firstly, in all the societies, there has been a law in one form or the other. There has been difference in law of different societies. The term “law” includes different things in different societies and hence it is understood in different sense in different societies. Any definition of law which fails to encompass all these senses or meanings cannot be said to be a good definition. Secondly, different definitions of the same thing can be given if it is viewed from different angles. A definition unable to cover all possible angles would be an imperfect definition. Thirdly, Law grows and develops with the society. In modern times, the development in the society has been tremendously fast, The law is required to cover all new fields. To keep pace with the fast advancing society, the scope of law always keeps changing. This adds to the constraints in defining law. MORRIS has explained the difficulty in defining law by giving an example. He said that a horse means a genus of mammalian for a Zoologist, it is a means of transportation for a traveller, it is a sport of kings for an average man and an article of food in certain nations. It depends on the angle one looks at it. The question is how the definition of the horse is to be arrived at. The definition will be different from the points of view of a Zoologist, a traveller, an average man etc. In the same manner, law has been variously defined by various individuals from different points of view. It is therefore, there is no unanimity of opinion regarding the definition of law. ARNOLD has very rightly said “Obviously, Law can never be defined. (1)ENTERFRETATION OF STATUTES With equal obviousness, it should be said that adherents of | i I 5 at a s of legal instit must never give up the struggle to define the law”. 2 eee Despite this position, various schools of law have a law from the different angles. Some have defined it on the basis of its nature whereas some have given attention to its source. Some jurists have dehre| the law in terms of its effect on society whereas others have concentrated on the purpose for which law is made, The definitions of law put forth by various jurists are given below. JUSTINIAN : Law is the kin, ought to be the chief, the ruler the standard of what is just 'ttempted to define the g of all mortal and immortal affairs, which and the leader of the noble, and the base and thus and unjust, the commander to animals naturally social of what they should do, the forbidder of what they should not do. BLACKSTONE : Law in its most general and comprehensive sense signifies a rule of action and is applied indiscriminately to all kinds of action whether animate or inanimate, rational or irrational. Thus we say the laws of ~ gravitation or optics or mechanics as well as the laws of nature and nations. KANT : Law is the sum total of the conditions under which the personal wishes of one man can be combined with the personal wishes of another man in accordance with the general law of freedom. AUSTIN : Law is the command of the sovereign. It imposes a duty and is backed by sanction. Command, duty and sanction are three elements of law. JUSTICE HOLMES : Law is a statement of the circumstances in which the public force will be brought to bear upon men through courts. GRAY : The law of the state or of any organized body of men is composed of the rules which the courts, i.e., the judicial organs of that body lay down for determination of legal rights and duties. SALMOND : The law is body of principles recognized and applied by the state in administration of justice. In Gulf Goans Hotels Co. Ltd. v. Union of India,’ the Supreme Court has elaborately discussed the issue. It has observed that the question “what is ‘law” has perplexed many a jurisprude, yet, the search for the elusive definition continues. It may be unwise to posit an answer to the question; rather, one may proceed b; y examining the points of consensus in jurisprudential theories. What appears to be common to all these theories is the notion that law must Possess a certain form; contain a clear mandate/explicit command which may be Prescriptive, permissive or penal and the law must also seek to achieve a clearly identifiable purpose. While the form itself or absence thereof will not be determinative and iINTRODUCTION 3 would deprive the orders of the immunity conferred by the aforesaid clauses and they may be open to challenge on the ground that they have not been made by or under the authority of the President in which case the burden would be on the Government to show that they were, in fact, 80 made, In the absence of due authentication and promulgation of the guidelines, the contents thereof cannot be treated as an order of the Government and would really represent an expression of opinion (Paras 19, 20 & 21). It is also essential that what is claimed to be a law must be notified or made public in order to bind the citizen. So the mode of publication is concerned, such mode must be as prescribed by the statute. In the event the statute does not contain any prescription and even under the subordinate legislation there is silence in the matter, the legislation will take effect only when it is published through the customarily recognized official channel, namely, the Official Gazette. Admittedly, the “guidelines” concerned were not gazetted (Paras 22 & 24). ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF LAW In view of the judgment of Supreme Court supra, it is clear that the Law must fulfill following essentials : @ it must possess a certain form; (i) it must contain a clear mandate or an explicit command which may be prescriptive, permissive or penal; (iii) it must seek to achieve a clearly identifiable purpose; and (iv) it must be notified or made public in order to bind the citizen. NATURE, OBJECT AND FUNCTION OF LAW _. Law governs the relationships between people. It reflects the values of the society. Since the society is dynamic, its realities keep on changing. The law must follow the change and mould itself sympathetically. The change in law is therefore an outcome of a change in social reality. In Surya Baksh Singh v. State of U.P.,* the Supreme Court held that the law is dynamic and not immutable or static. It constantly adapts itself to critically changing compulsions of society. In Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse,’ it was held that the law regulates relationships between people. It prescribes patterns of behaviour. It reflects. the values of society. The role of the court is to understand the purpose of law in society and to help the law achieve its purpose. But the law of a society is a living organism. It is based on a given factual and social reality that is constantly changing. Sometimes change in law precedes societal change and is even intended to stimulate it, In most cases, however, a change in law is the result of a change in social reality. Indeed, when social reality changes, the law must change too. Just as change in social reality is the law of life, responsiveness to change in social reality is the life of the law. It can be said that the history of law is the history of adapting the law to society's changing needs. In both constitutional and statutory interpretation, the court is supposed to exercise cee 1. (2014) 14 SCC 222. 2. (2014) 1 SCC 188 : AIR 2014 SC 869.INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES 5 2 on the subjective a: di tion in determining the proper relationship betwee i id iseret ete objective purposes of the law BS OF LAW : Senet ~ of aw" denotes the origin of Jaw or from where the law Wasa abe le { opinions about sources of law, = from or is conceived. There are dive n' : stl sO cae that law originates from sovereign. According, to theologians aes putes from God. The Vedas are primary source of Hindu Law which hae considered to be the words of God. Similarly Quran is ain source of Mohammedan Law which is also considered to be revealed by God. SALMOND has divided the sources of law into two classes : The sources from which the law derives its force and validity. Such sourees are called Formal sources. (b) The sources from which law derives the matter of which it is composed. Such sources are called Material sources. Material sources are sub divided into two : The term “sour (a) G) Legal sources : These sources are in authoritative form. These are immediate source of law. Legal sources could be of many kinds : —Enacted law : which has its source in legislation —Case law : which has its source in precedent —Customary law : which has its source in custom —Conventional law —_ : which has its source in agreement Gi) Historical sources : The rest of the sources of law are termed as historical sources. They are un-authoritative. They have no legal recognition. Juristic writings, foreign decisions ete. fall under this class. Only guidance can be taken by the courts from these sources. The above classification of sources of law was subjected to severe criticism by various jurists, particularly KEETON and ALLEN. KEETON presented his own classification but it did not substantially differ from what SALMOND had proposed. Salmond’s classification gives an idea about various sources of law and their nature. Jn modern times, most of the law is made by way of legislation which is considerably supplemented by case laws. KINDS OF LAW ‘There are various kinds of laws as mentioned below : Imperative law Imperative laws are those which prescribe a gene i imposed by some enforcing authority either by physical force oo an one oe of compulsion. They are classified in two categories viz. divine oc hornn, The divine laws are the commands imposed by God upon men. They are carved by threats of punishment either in this world or in the next world. On the otherINTRODUCTION S hand, human laws consist of essential rules imposed upon men. According to Salmond, the imperative law must have following characteristics— (i) the command of the sovereign must be in the form of a general rule, and not a particular command addressed to a particular individual or individuals only; and Gi) the observance of law must not depend upon the pleasure of the people, it should rather be enforced by some authority or machinery of State. Physical Law or Law of Nature or Scientific Law ‘The physical laws or the laws of science are expressions of the uniformities of the nature. They are the general principles expressing the regularity that can be observed in the activities and operations of the universe. They are neither created by men nor can they be changed by them. They are the laws of nature. In contrast to human laws, the natural laws do not vary from place to place and from time to time. Natural Law or Moral Law The natural laws or moral laws are the principles of natural right and wrong. The natural law has been named as divine law, the law of reason, the universal or common law and eternal law. It is called the command of God imposed upon men. It is established by that reason by which the world is governed. It is written in the hearts of men by the finger of nature. It is universally obeyed in all places and by all people. It does not possess physical compulsion. It embodies the principles of morality. Its principles are common to all the States. Conventional Law Conventional law refers to any rule or system of rules agreed upon by persons for the regulation of their conduct towards each other. It is a form of special law. It is law for the parties who subscribe to it. For example rules of any society. However, sometimes conventional law is enforced by the State. In that case it becomes a part of the civil law. Customary Law ‘The term “custom” means tradition. When some kind of action gets general approval and is generally observed for a long time, it becomes a custom. When acustom is firmly established, it transforms into a law which is enforceable by the authority of the State. Therefore customary law may be defined as any rule of action which is actually observed by men. Customary law is an important source of law. Practical or Technical Law Practical or technical law consists of rules for the attainment of certain ends. These rules guide us as to what we ought to do in order to attain a certain end. The laws of health and laws of architecture are few examples of practical or technical laws.INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES: 6 aw | law consists of those rules which are acknowledged by the tea ie The States not only agree to observe these rules in thet Ore oe ne another but also consider them to be binding upon them jn dealings Mal relations. Thus international laws govern sovereign States in inn ations. fae relations and conduct, towards each other. International Li Internationa Civil Law ; : Civil law is the law of the land. It is uniform in nature and its uniformity is preserved by judicial precedents. It has an imperative character. It carries legal sanction. It is territorial in nature, i.e., it applies only within the territory of the State. It creates legal rights. It is enforced by the State. Its violation is punishable with attachments, fine or imprisonment. Common Law In its historical origin, common law was taken to mean the whole of the law of England including equity. Statute law was referred to separately because of its authority. Statute Law Statute law is made by the legislature. In modern times, statute law has developed to a very great extent and even certain portions of the common law are undergoing a slow transformation into statute law by the process known as codification. Law of equity Salmond says that the term “equity” has three meanings, viz., (i) morality, honesty and uprightness; (ii) principles of natural justice; and (iii) a set of fixed rules. During the 13th century, common law in England had become very rigid. A need was therefore felt to reduce such rigidity. For this purpose, the law was gradually supplemented by principles of equity, justice and good conscience of judges. However, it led to conflicting decisions. In order to secure uniformity in judgments, a body of equitable rules was formulated. These rules supplemented to the rules of common law. Gradually, the equitable principles came to be recognized as principles superior to the rules of common law. Equity became a body of principles decided on the basis of precedents laid down by judges, Today equity has been merged into law. Equitable principle: i cauity has been merged i principles are as effective as the Constitutional Law According to Salmond, Constitutional principles which determine the Constitution of ie ance Powe, of those legal tution of the State. It is the body of rul: governing the relation between the soverei is subj dl the ‘different Darts of the sovereign hal i govereien and his subjects and the different S i des all rules which di indi: e fundamental law ofa State directing the principles upon which the GovernmentINTRODUCTION is founded and regulating the exercise of the sovereign powers. Administrative Law Administrative law is the law relating to the administration. It determines the organization, powers and duties of administrative authorities. Special Laws Salmond refers to six kinds of special laws, viz., Local Law, Foreign Law, Conventional Law, Autonomic Law, Martial Law and International Law as administered in Prize Courts. (a) b) © @) © Local Law.—Local law is the law of a particular locality and not the general law of the whole country. There may be customs which have obtained the force of law in certain localities and within those localities, that customary law supersedes the general law. Foreign Law.—Foreign Law means a law of any other State. Whereas everyone is supposed to know the law of the land, it is not necessary to know the foreign law. Ignorance of law of the land is no excuse but the ignorance of foreign law is excusable. In certain cases, foreign law is required to be considered for the purpose of imparting justice to the litigating parties. For example, in the case of a contract ‘entered into in a foreign country, no justice can be done unless the case is decided according to the law of the place where the contract was entered into. Therefore, it becomes necessary to take account of a system of foreign law for determination of the rights and liabilities of the parties. Conventional Law.—Conventional law has its source in the agreement. It is law for the parties who subscribe to it. As such, an Agreement is law for those who make it. The law of a society is an example of conventional law. ‘Autonomic law.—Autonomic law means the law made by subordinate legislative authority. The rules and regulations made by the University for governing its functions is an example of autonomic law. Martial Law.—Martial law is the law administered in the military courts. It is of three kinds— (i) _ the law for the discipline and control of the army itself; which is commonly called Military Law; (ji) the law applied to a foreign land which comes into the occupation of military during war time. Such occupied foreign land is governed by the Military Commander and the law depends upon his pleasure. the law by which the army governs the realm in the times of war, for the purposes of public safety or military necessity. Martial law is different from military law. Military law is embodied inthe Army Act and applies only to the soldiers. The offences under ‘Army Act are triable by the courts martial. On ‘the other hand, the @iINTERPRETATION OF STATUTES Jdiers and civilians in times of w, lies to both so! D : eae i APP perefore a temporary law while military lay Martial la permanent Jaw. ize Law (Inter! y ou ).—Prize law regul ational Law as administered in Prigg pms the practice of the capture of ships sees at sea in times of war. It is administered by the Prizg and cargoes at et war. The Prize Courts are established ang Courts in oiiihe States within their territory, if they are desirous ne f capture. The Prize courts investigate the exercising right o! 2 of exercising The captures of ships and cargoes. If the sein awful, the property is adjudged as a lawful prize of war. If the same ig found unlawful, orders are passed for the return of that property, Mercantile Customs.—This is a special law which consists of the body of mercantile usage. The whole of the Indian law relating to hundis derives its origin from mercantile customs. THREE ORGANS OF GOVERNMENT The Government has to carry out three kinds of functions, viz., legislative function, executive function and judicial function. Each function is performed through organs especially constituted for the purpose. The legislative function is carried out by Legislature. The legislature makes law. The executive function is discharged by the executive. It conducts the administrative departments of the state. But this function is coupled with certain subordinate legislative powers which have been expressly delegated to it by Parliament or pertain to it by the common law. Many times, the statute itself entrusts to the executive the duty to issue more detailed regulations on the same matter in order to supplement the statutory provisions. Judiciary is the organ which interprets the law and administers justice. Certain delegated legislative powers are possessed by the judicature, The Superior courts have the power of making rules or the regulation of theiv oma sense of the term, differing in ‘The doctrine of separation of power restrict i f s these organs from interferin, a a others functions, Although the Constitution of India has not ecomnized a eon of separation of powers in its absolute rigidity, but the functions of Tent parts of the government have been sufficiently differentiated.INTRODUCTION 9 separation of powers restricts each org: and rules out the encroachment by one LEGISLATION The term “legi: “latum”. The term an of the Government to its own field organ into the domain of the other. ion” is derived from two Latin words, “legis” and means law and “lat ns to make. Therefore ¢ the law. According to SALMOND “the legislation is of law which consists in deel tion of legal rules by a competent authorit ccording to GRAY, legislation means the formal utterances of the legislative organs of the society. . ee legislation means to ms that sour PROCESS OF LEGISLATION Legislation is the main source of law. Legislation means declaration of legal rules by a competent authority. To legislate is to make new law. As such any act having the effect of adding, altering, modifying or amending a law is an act of legislative authority. The Parliament is the sovereign authority having the power to legislate. Making law is the chief function of the Legislature. For this purpose, a draft of proposed law is prepared, It is called Bill, The Bill is introduced in the Parliament for passing. A Bill (except Money Bill) may either be moved before Lok Sabha or before Rajya Sabha. Parliament holds discussions on that Bill. ‘An amendment to the Bill may also be moved. After the debate, the bill is either passed or is not passed considering the majority opinion. If the bill is passed by one House, it is sent to other House where similar process is repeated. Unless both the Houses approve a Bill, the Bill cannot be deemed to have been finally passed. After being passed by both the Houses, the Bill is sent to the President for approval. On receipt of President's assent, the Bill attains finality and it becomes law. ENACTED LAW OR STATUTE LAW In the strict sense, legislation means the laying down of legal rules either by a sovereign or by a subordinate authority. Legislature lays down rules for the future and without reference to any actual dispute. Legislation includes every expression of the will of the legislature. Every Act of Parliament is an example of legislation, irrespective of its purpose and effect. The law which has its source in legislation is termed as “enacted law or enactment”. The more familiar term, however, is “statute law”. SUPREME AND SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION According to SALMOND, legislation is either supreme or subordinate. ‘The supreme legislation is the result of the act of supreme or sovereign ae which is the Parliament or Legislature. As such, the supreme law cannot be abrogated, repealed, annulled, modified or amended by any’ other authority except the maker of law itself. ‘The exercise of function of legislative is often entrusted to the Sane For instance, framing of rules and regulations etc. which are an ly legislative in character are frequently designated to the executive. The lawINTERPRETATION OF STATUTES 10 ; ities is called subordinate legislation, " ecutive authori ‘ = made by such exerue™ Troceeds from any authority other than the sovaret® subordinate lesict gon is subordinate and is subject to validation of 1 aa rey It can also be repealed by sovereign legislation. In a. ne supreme authority. Mt mfrontation, the subordinate legislation must give wt any inconsistent ation. It may also be of a derivative nature that is to say «yey to sovereign rei te has been delegated by the sovereign to the subordina’ a Leer that power to make law is given to various authorities does not it the [2 a e : : extinguish Parliament’s own law making authority. MORALS AND LAW ‘The term “morals” refer to ethics or principles by which the life of ay individual is governed. Morals lay down the rules for moulding the character of an individual. However, the morals are purely the matter of individual conscience and impose no obligation on the individual to observe them. Morals and law are closely related to each other on account of common origin. Yet they are different from each other and are clearly distinguishable. Relationship between Morals and Law The morals and law are so blended with each other that sometimes it becomes difficult to draw a line of distinction between them. Morals have deeply penetrated into the fabric of law in the name of justice, equity, good faith and conscience. Moral considerations are vital while making law and while exercising judicial discretion. Morals put a restraint on the law-making power of the legislature in the sense that no legislature can make a law which is opposed to the morals of society. All human conduct and social relations cannot be governed by law alone. Many relations are left to be regulated by morals. The relationship of morals and law can be discussed under following heads : (a) Morals are the basis of Law: _In the initial stages of the social system, there was no distinction between law and morals. All the rules found their origin from the common source. The fear of supernatural power worked as sanction behind those rules. Subsequently, the State came into existence. They enforced those rules which were important from social point of view. Such rules came to be called law. Thus, law and morals have a common origin but they came to differ in course of development. Owing to this reason, many rules are common to both law and morals. Yet, law and morality are two different things. Many things may be immoral but not illegal. There are several legal rules which are not founded on morals. For instance, vicarious liability is provided in law but the morals do ane aman vicariously liable. Some of the legal rules are even opposed to (b) Morals are the test of Law: Many jurist: : Middle yeild ists maintain that law must conform to morals. During the ges, it w ; invalid. Dein Na’ opined that any law which did not conform to morals is ing the 17th and 18th centuries, it Was contended that any law“INTRODUCTION uN which did not conform to natural law must be disobeyed and the government which made that law was to be overthrown, In modern times, a law is considered to be valid and binding even if it is not in conformity with morals. However, ordinarily, laws conform to morals. (c) Morals are the end of Law: pury W is to secure justi aimed to the welfare of society and evaluation of such interests. @ Morals are the part of Law: are often considered as the end of law. The reason is that the and the justi is based on morals, Law to secure social interests. Moral is an believe that even if law and morals are distinguishable, morality is an integral part of law, Their argument is founded on the fact that the law in action is not a mere system of rules but involves the use of certain principles, such as that of equitable and the good. Distinction between Morals and Law Morals and Law may be distinguished as under : SLNo. Morals Law 1. Morals relate to the individual and not to the society. Law is focused on the society as a whole. re In morality the individual is subject to the dictates of his own conscience. In law the individual submits to the Will of organized society. 3. The observance of morals is a matter of individual conscience. The individual may or may not follow the morality. ‘Observance of law is mandatory. It is not at the choice of individual. The individual is bound to obey law. Law brings into the picture the complete machinery of the State. 4. Morals give guidance to a man, irrespective of whether he lives in community or in isolation (alone). Law considers man only in so far as he lives in community with others. a Morals lay down the rules for moulding of the character of the individual. Law provides the rules of relationships of individuals with each other and with the State. 6. Morals are an end in themselves. They should be followed because they are good in themselves. Law is for the purpose of convenience and expediency. Its chief aim is to help smooth running of society. 7. Morals look to the inherent value of conduct, i.e., proper intention or motive, and not the external conduct. ‘Law looks to the external conduct or the act of the individual for which it lays down standards.INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES. 2 8. Morals have universal value. | Law varies from society te society, Generally they do not vary from | time to time and place to place. society to society, time to time and place to place. 9. Morals are applied after taking | Application of law is uniform. into consideration the individual cases.INTRODUCTION 3 CHAPTER SUMMARY What is law—It is very difficult to define the term “law” for various reasons. Yet various jurists have proposed definition of law in their own way. Some have defined it on the basis its nature, whereas some have given attention to its source. Some jurists have defined the law in terms of its effect on society whereas others have concentrated on the purpose for which law is made. Essential ingredients of law.—The Law must (i) possess a certain form; (ii) contain a clear mandate or an explicit command which may be prescriptive, permissive or penal; (iii) seek to achieve a clearly identifiable purpose; and (iv) be notified or made public in order to bind the citizen. Nature, object and function of law.—Law governs the relationships between people. It reflects the values of the society. Since the society is dynamic, its realities keep on changing. The law must follow the change and mould itself sympathetically. The change in law is therefore an outcome ofa change in social reality. Sources of law—The sources of law are classified into two categories. Firstly those sources from where the law derives its force and validity, i.e., Formal sources and secondly the sources from which law derives the matter of which it is composed, i.e., Material sources. Material sources comprise of Legal sources and Historical sources. Legal sources are in authoritative form. They can be in form of Enacted law, Case law, Customary law and Conventional law. The rest of the sources of law are termed as Historical sources. They are un- authoritative. Juristic writings, foreign decisions ete. fall under this class. Only guidance can be taken by the courts from these sources. Kinds of law.—There are various kinds of laws—(i) Imperative law, which prescribes a general’ course of action imposed by some enforcing authority. When it consists of commands imposed by God upon men, it is called “divine” and when it comprises the rules imposed upon men, it is called “human”; (ii) Physical Law or Law of Nature or Scientific Law, which is the Jaw of nature dealing with the uniformities and regularities of the universe; ii) Natural Law or Moral Law, which embodies the principles of morality; (iv) Conventional Law, which is in form of rule or a system agreed upon by persons for the regulation of their conduct towards each other, e.g., rules of any society; (v) Customary Law, which is based on the custom or tradition, actually observed by men; (vi) Practical or Technical Law, which consists of the rules for the attainment of certain ends; (vii) International Law, that comprises rules acknowledged by the sovereign States and which govern the sovereign States in their relations and conduct towards each other; (viii) Civil Law, which is the law of the land, imposed by the State and which carries legal sanction; (ix) Common Law, which is taken to mean the whole of the law of England including equity; (x) Statute Law, which is made by the legislature; (xi) Law of equity, which is based on equitable principles decided on the basis of precedents laid down by judges; (xi) Constitutional Law, which consists of the rules governing the relation between the sovereign and his subjects; (xii) ‘Administrative Law, which deals with the organization, powers and duties of administrative authorities; and (xiii) Special Law, including Local Law, Foreign Law, Conventional Law, Autonomic Law, Martial Law and International Law as administered in Prize Courts.INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES 4 1 overnment has to carry out three executive function and judicial especially constituted estricts these organg ns of Government—! he Ge iz., legislative funchon: | ae nis performed through organs © ation of power Three or kinds of function Each functior HO function ff separe serge. The doctrine of separalion’ reales a for the purpose. ‘The ae nine of Mtyetions. ‘The hegislatare oe law. The from interfering. e2Ch eae een ative, which is coup jed with certain lischarge viyoon expressly delegated to it by cutive function is ¢ ative powe to it by the whieh he common law a subordinate legit Parhament or pertain Boia ae caec Tagan wins 1 jnoke dio la) The Negilatin i Legislation Lenora in declaration of logal rules by a competent vjaton means the formal utterances of the legislative organs of that soure hority. 1 society : Process of legislation—Legislation is the main sowie of law. To cislate is to make new law. As such any act having the effect of adding, f legislative authority. The toring, modifying or amending a law is an act o} h : he power to legislate. The Parliament is the sovereign authority having t! ; ‘srliament consists of two Houses namely Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. For king of a law, a Bill is introduced before either House. After discussions and ste, the Bill is either passed or rejected by majority. If the Bill is passed by one House, it is sent to other House. If the other House also passes the Bill, then Bill is sent to the President. Bill becomes law after it receives President's ent, Enacted law or statute law—The law which has its source in legislation termed as “enacted law or enactment”. The more familiar term, however, is ‘statute la Supreme and subordinate legislation—The law made by Legislature preme legislation. As such, the supreme law can be abrogated, repealed; nulled, modified or amended by the maker of law itself. Sometimes es like ee of rules and regulations etc. are entrusted to ce he ee made 7 oe executive authorities is called subordinate Seas ped to ~ on of the supreme authority. It can also be epealed by n legislation. In case of any inconsi: legislation shall have overriding effect. - er earns Supreme a lag and lo —Moals aro the ethics, govering the ie of an ae - They are closely related to law. The origin of morals v common, Even today, the morals are found embedded in the aber a in Ga he laws ae equity, good faith and conscience. Morals put a restraint aa Goede of ae Paslauure since no legislature can make a law osed to the morals of society. Morals ari aie “ art of la ey are the tes ‘als are the basi 0 : Laliiirne ul are the test of law, and they are the end of law ae ceed clearly diatinguis habe from law, Wherens morals relate to indiv a eae es e society as a whole. In moralit 1 eet et ee ohig ‘a y th dictates of his own conscience but in law, he eee Fie ee society. No individual is bound to observe morality but oly Will of organized mandatory. Morals have universal value and generally the nae oS society to society, time to time and place to place heme. do not vary from to society, time to time and place to place. 's laws vary from societytends nee CHAPTER Il THE MEANING, OBJECT AND NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION SYNOPSIS MEANING OF INTERPRETATION INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATION MEANING OF AMBIGUITY Latent Ambiguity Patent Ambiguity NECESSITY TO INTERPRET A PROVISION CHAPTER SUMMARY MEANING OF INTERPRETATION In India, the law making power rests with the Legislature. It is the Legislature, who enjoys the authority to legislate. Law is enacted by the Legislature with a definite purpose in mind. The Legislature opens its mind in form of certain language. Hence, every law finds its expression in the language itself. A statute therefore is the formal expression of the will of Legislature. The legislated law or statute law has attained supremacy over all other sources of law. The other sources have almost yielded before it. It has become a type of standard. It is embodied in an authoritative form of written words. This literary expression is an essential part of the law. The courts are supposed to administer justice according to the mandate of law enacted by the Legislature. In other words, it is the duty of the courts to apply the letter of the law. Therefore it is necessary to understand the language of the statute in its correct and true sense so that the intention of legislature is carried out properly and the object and purpose for which statute was enacted is achieved. To ascertain the true sense of the language, it is necessary to assign correct meaning to the words and expressions used in the language. It is presumed that the legislature has used appropriate, clear and precise words to express itself. But where a word bears more than one meaning, the language of the statute might be understood in two or more senses, out of which only one may be in tune with the true intention of legislature. Therefore it becomes necessary to determine what meaning is to be given to a word used in the legislation. It is this exercise which is the subject matter of interpretation. Interpretation therefore can be defined as a process which is adopted for ascertaining the meaning of writings or intent of the framers of the document. According to SALMOND, by interpretation is meant the process by which courts seek to ascertain the meaning of legielation through the medium (23)INTERPRETATION of STATUTES yay itis expressed. sms in which it is exPFOSS ee Shaily Mishra Mittal’ the connotation of express, Shaily Mio jeld that interpretation is process ‘ ned. Tt fe rani of statutory provision for purpose of applying of authoritative fo In Anurag Mittal v- “Interpretation”, Was © which court determines ™ it to situation before it. ing statute 1a sting and applying 6 law : Det ine preaning. Statute law is rigid and bound within ‘hel ea tive letters, if the words of the statute are clear. Where the words i ii ent are not clear, the court can exercise its discretion to interpret the of thi , the co statute in accordance with its object and purpose, In Bhatia International v. Bulle Trading S.A." it was held that jdiciat art of interpretation is imbued with creativity as wel as realism because arforpretation implies a degree of diseretio® and choice, regardless of the - conventional principle that Judges are to expound, not legislate. In TN. Electricity Board v. Status Spg- Mills Ltd.,° the Apex Court held that the court has the last say in interpretation of statutes. INTERPRETATION AND CONSTRUCTION the process of determination of the ie., Interpretation and Construction. interpretation means the act translation, exposition ete. the way in which something ww, the courts are concerned with Two expressions are used to refer t meaning of language used in the statute, ‘According to Webstar's New World Dictionary, or result of interpreting, explanation, meaning, Construction is an act or process of constructing, is constructed, manner or method of building. COOLEY made an effort to distinguish these two terms. According to him, “interpretation” is the art of finding out the true sense of any form of words and enabling others to derive from them the same idea which the author intended to convey whereas “construction” is the process of drawing conclusions respecting subjects that. lie beyond the direct expression of text which are in the spirit though not within the letter of law. In simpler terms, it can be said that in “interpretation”, we find out true meaning of the words used in the language but in “construction” we draw the real sense of the language itself which might not be prima facie ee in bee words used in the language. However, today in common ey i words are taken as synonyms of each other and also used OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATION The obj : This eee ee is to discover what the Legislature intended. that the Legislature aed from the text of enactment. It is presume peaks ita mind by use of correct expressions 42 therefore, unless there i i ‘ere is an ambiguity in the words used in the language, the 1. (2018) 9SCC 691 : Ar R 20 2. (2002) 4 SCC 105: AIR 2002 sc ve 3. (2008) 7 SCC 353 : AIR 2008 sc 2,THE MEANING, OBJECT AND NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION 25 their plain and ordinary meaning and then the language should be understood in its literal sense. If the results drawn are absurd, then the courts should look for some other “logical” meaning of those words to remove the ambiguity and absurdity. The idea behind this is that the Legislature is not expected to have used the words capable of bearing more than one meaning, so as to lead to alternative constructions, but if such a situation arises, then the construction which advances the policy of the enactment must be upheld. In Mahadev Govind Gharge v. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Upper Krishna Project, Jamkhandi, Karnataka,' it was held that the provisions of a statute are normally construed to achieve the ends of justice, advance the interest of public and to avoid multiplicity of litigation. In Sri Jeyaram Educational Trust v. A.G. Syed Mohideen,? it was held that the purpose of interpretation is not to make a provision what the judge thinks it should be, but to make it what the legislature intended it to be. MEANING OF AMBIGUITY The term “ambiguity” means uncertainty. When a particular word is said to be ambiguous, it means that such word bears doubtful sense or uncertain meaning and it is open to more than one meaning. Some examples of ambiguous words are given below : “Award” | means (j) prize, e.g., he received bravery award at the hands of the Prime Minister; (ii) decision of court, e.g., the Labour Court passed an award in favour of complainant; etc. “Current” | means (i) in common or general use, e.g., current coins are made of metal; (ii) of the present time, e.g., the house-owner shall charge higher rent in the current month; or current prices of the commodities are beyond reach of the common man; or for success in the competitive exam, one must be aware of current affairs; (iii) a stream of water, air or gas, e.g., water current in the rivers is turbulent at the place where they originate; (iv) flow of electricity, e.g., he did not pay the electricity bill and hence the current supply in his house has been terminated; etc. “Plant” means (i) to fix something stealthily, e.g., the terrorists may plant the bomb in market area; (ii) living organism smaller than trees and shrubs, e.g., you can get a rose plant from a nursery; (iii) equipments of an institution, e.g., the plant and machinery of the industry was damaged by the striking workers; (iv) to sow the seeds or to put a sapling in the ground, eg., this tree was planted by the Chairman of the Company; (v) an industry set-up to generate or produce some commodity in large scale, e.g., there is a Thermal Power Plant in Koradi, near Nagpur; etc. 1. 2011 (6) SCC 321. 2, AIR 2010 SC 671 : 2010 (2) SCC 513.INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES ‘ =| 26 | ‘oppage of work, @.g., the fag ae Soaterday; (ii) to hit, eg., one me wom He ii) to produce the flame by rubbing. ip! Yikg po tto cause to sound, &£., the clock striker ttike iv) how did this idea strike to your mind. 0) Ted to obtain water/gas/oil from aul = nig land to meet the water require fc ig quite well now; (iii) satisfncto 11; (iv) properly, e.4., one must beha (o) thoroughly, cf have You prepared well for the exams: “nation, eg. where there is a will, th i) determination, ¢.8+ , there i, ay * auxiliary verb expressing future tense, e.g., he wiq) 7 wars (ome town by car; (iv) an instrument for bequeathis 10 i perty which is intended to take effect after the death @ testator, @g., it is advisable to execute a Will in order to avoid property disputes in future; etc. we the words used in a language are capable of bearing more thay one ees is a reasonable possibility that the language is understood in two different senses. In that event, it becomes necessary to determine which meaning should be considered to be correct. However, such a difficulty shall not arise if the words of a statute do not suffer from ambiguity. Therefore, the first and foremost principle of interpretation is that if the words are plain, precise, unambiguous and bear only one meaning, then they should be assigned their natural and ordinary meaning. On the other hand, where the language of a provision gives out two different meanings due to ambiguity of the words, then it would be legitimate for the courts to reject that interpretation, which will introduce uncertainty, friction or confusion and uphold the one which best effectuates the purpose of the legislation. means (i) CO! went on str when iron 18 the match; () into mind, 6.8 “Strike” ke frot come bsurk vil = (i) a hole dri ‘ Ment: Tc mem well is dug on h fod health, C8 in go 2 retage, he sang wel the o =Wwill means The ambiguities are of two kinds, viz., Latent ambiguity (ambiguitas latens) and Patent ambiguity (ambiguitas patens). Latent ambiguity : Bs The term “latent” literally means hidden or concealed or suppressed. jerefore such ambiguity is not apparent in the language used in a instrument. On the face of it, the language is certain and explicit but the ambiguity is introduced bs . z y evidence of som: insi lateral matter outside the instruraens thing extrinsic or by some col She Will the words may be clear and precise but by the drawn, only one could 1aetnes® may be revealed. Out of many meaning testator may be shown pov’, bce intended by the testator, The intention 4 may be shown by extrinsic evidence, seatadtt Mlustration will elucidat estator may say, “] bequeath Rs. 's apparently free from ambi’, For example, extrinsic evide © what latent ambiguity is. In a Will, the Fenane lac to my cousin named X”. The languae identical name *X’, the unce; guity. But if the testator has two cousins ¢ i i taint : 0 ct : Evidence is admissible to shew feta in as to which cousin is intend” ‘Mtion.THE MEANING, OBJECT AND NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION 27 Patent ambiguity : The term “patent” literally means obvious. This kind of ambiguity is apparent on the face of the instrument. In case of patent ambiguity, no extrinsic evidence is admissible to deduce the intention. For example, in a Will, a testator bequeaths Rs. one Jac to his Rs. one lac to his cousin ‘2’. He has no aunt of the name of ‘2’. Aft bequeaths Rs. two lacs of his before mentioned aunt ‘Y'. Now the question is whom he refers to by stating “before mentioned aunt Y”. No extrinsic evidence is admissible to show the intention of the testator. NECESSITY TO INTERPRET A PROVISION The question is when it becomes necessary to construe a provision. If the words used are certain and precise and admit of only one meaning, there is no need to expound those words. Similarly if the language is plain and explicit, it should be given effect. The rules of interpretation can be invoked only if there is any doubt with regard to the language used. In other words, a statute is to be interpreted when it is ambiguous. But when the words of a statute are clear and plain and are susceptible of only one meaning, the courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of consequences. Following case laws effectively answer this vital question. In Keshauji Ravji & Co. v. C.LT.,' the Apex court observed that as long as there is no ambiguity in the statutory language, resort to any interpretative process to unfold the legislative intent cannot then be applied to whittle down. the statutory language which is otherwise unambiguous. If the intendment is not in the words used, it is nowhere else. The need of interpretation arises when the words used in the statute are on their own terms, ambivalent and do not manifest the intention of legislature. In Arul Nadar vy. Authorised Officer, Land Reforms,® Section 21-A of Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 (58 of 1961) was interpreted by Supreme Court. It was held that the contentions that the object of the Act being to further reduce the ceiling area, Section 21- A, if made applicable to the pending proceeding, then the said ebject would be frustrated, cannot be sustained inasmuch as when the language of a statute is unambiguous, in interpreting the provisions thereof, it is not necessary to look into the legislative intent or the object of the Act. In Ombalika Das v. Hulisa Shaw,’ Supreme Court construed Section 29-B of West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. It was held that for the purpose of interpreting a provision of law, resort can be had to the legislative intent if the language employed by the Legislature is doubtful or susceptible of meanings more than one. But when the language is plain and explicit and does not admit of any doubtful interpretation, the Supreme Court cannot, by reference to an assumed legislative intent, expand the meaning of an expression employed by the Legislature and therein include such category of persons as the Legislature has not chosen to di 1. (1990) 2 SCC 231. 2, (1998) 7SCC 157. 3, (2002) 4 SCC 539.2 INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES State of Gujarat,' it was held L to interpret a statute can In Prakash Kumar alias Prakash Bhutto v. that itis. a tite law (hat the jurisdiction of the cou bo invoked only in caso of ambiguity, It ia alao well actiled that every statute s to be interpreted without any violence to its language. When an expiendion apable of mere than one meaning, the court would attempt to oe the ambiguity in a manner consistent with the purpose of the provision, having regard to the consequences of the alternative constructions. In Pandian Chemicals Lid. v, CL, the said question has been ae by Supreme Court by holding that the rules of interpretation woul = into play only if there is any doubt with regard to the express eters ae ; Where the words ave unequivocal, there is no scope for importing any rule of interpretation. In Tata Consultancy Services v. State of A. that it is furthermore trite that a court should not ambiguities or obscurities in words which are plain. In Executive Engineer No. 4 BRLBC Division, Shimoga v. Lokesh Reddy,* the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court held that such necessity arises, if words in a statute are susceptible to more than one construction. In case of plain words there is no necessity to invoke any rule to ascertain legislative intent. In Nasiruddin v. Sita Ram Agarwal,’ it was held that the court's jurisdiction to interpret a statute can be invoked when the same is ambiguous. it is well known that in a given case the court can iron out the creases but it cannot change the texture of the fabric. It cannot enlarge the scope of legislation or intention when the language of the provision is plain and unambiguous. It cannot add or subtract words to a statute or read something into it which is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. In Bhavnagar University v. Palitana Sugar Mill (P) Ltd.,° it was held that it is the basic principle of construction of statute that the same should be read as a whole, then chapter by chapter, section by section and word by word. Recourse to construction or interpretation of statute is necessary when there is ambiguity, obscurity, or inconsistency therein and not otherwise. An effort must be made to give effect to all parts of the statute and unless absolutely necessary, no part thereof shall be rendered surplusage or redundant. True meaning of a provision of law has to be determined on the basis of what it provides by its clear language, with due regard to the scheme of law. Scope of the legislation on the intention of the Legislature cannot be enlarged when the language of the provision is plain and unambiguous. In other words, statutory enactments must ordinarily be construed according to their plain meaning and no words shall be added, altered or modified unless it is plainly necessary to do s0 to prevent a provision from being unintelligible, absurd, unreasonable, (2005) 2 SCC 409. (2003) 5 SCC 690. (2006) 1 SCC 308.” 2003 III CLR 126 (Karnataka High Court) (D.B.). (2003) 2 SCC 577. (2003) 2 SCC 111 : AIR 2003 SC 511. Pp, the Supreme Court observed be overzealous in searching ora eNe‘THE MEANING, OBJECT AND NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION 29 unworkable or totally irreconciliable with the rest of the statute. It is also well settled that a beneficent provision of legislation must be liberally construed so as to fulfil the statutory purpose and not to frustrate it, In Awdhesh Narayan Singh v. Adarsh Vidya Mandir Trust,’ it has been held that enacting a law is a legislative function. When Legislature delegates such power to an executive, it is permissible for the executive or government to exercise such power. Interpretation of statutory provision, primary or delegated, is a judicial function—pure and simple. The government cannot do both, use words in a statute and give meaning to those words. The former is power of government, the latter is of judiciary. Once a provision has been made, it is for the judiciary to give meaning to the words used by the rule making authority, to interpret them and to apply to concrete cases. In State of Jharkhand v. Govind Singh,? it was held that when the words of a statute are clear, plain or unambiguous, i.e., they are reasonably susceptible of only one meaning, the courts are bound to give effect to that meaning irrespective of consequences. Attention should be paid to what has been said as also to what has not been said. Court can interpret law but cannot legislate. In Sharadchandra Vasant Chitnis v. Mrs. Neela Ashok Korde,® the Bombay High Court observed that the Court has to give plain meaning to the language used by the legislation and only when the language used by the legislature is ambiguous the Court may try to interpret the same in such a way” that it serves and furthers the purpose and object of the legislation. But when there is no such ambiguity, question of reading something in the statute is not permissible. In CLT. v. Calcutta Knitwears,‘ it was held that where words of statute are absolutely clear and unambiguous, recourse cannot be had to principles of interpretation other than literal rule. - 2004 (1) Mh LJ 676 (Bom. HC) (FB). . (2005) 10 SCC 437. . 2008 (4) Mh.L.J. 873. . (2014) 6 SCC 444 : AIR 2014 SC 2970. Ree30 INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES CHAPTER SUMMARY Meaning of interpretation—Law ia enacted by the Legislature with a definite purpose in mind. The Legislature opens its mind in form of certain language. Hence, every law finds its expression in the language itself, The courts are supposed to administer justice necording Lo the mandate of law and hence the language of the statute is to be understood in its true sense. If the words are clear and precise, they themselves express the intention. But where a word bears more than one meaning, the language of the statute may give out, several senses. In such a case it becomes necessary to ascertain the meaning of the word, This exercise is known as interpretation. SALMOND says that by interpretation is meant the process by which courts seek to ascertain the meaning of legislation through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed. Interpretation and construction—Two expressions are used to refer to the process of determination of the meaning of language used in the statute, i.e., Interpretation and Construction. COOLEY distinguished these two terms. According to him “interpretation” is the art: of finding out the true sense of any form of words and enabling others to derive from them the same idea which the author intended to convey whereas “construction” is the process of drawing conclusions respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct expression of text which are in the spirit though not within the letter of law. However, presently both these words are taken synonyms of each other and also used synonymously. Object and purpose of interpretation—The object of interpretation is to discover what the Legislature intended. If the words are specific, they should be assigned their plain meaning and then the language should be understood in its literal sense. But where words are susceptible to more than one meaning, the courts have to ascertain what meaning the words bear so that true intention of Legislature can be derived. Meaning of ambiguity—The term “ambiguity” means uncertainty. When a particular word bears more than one meaning, it is said to be ambiguous. If the words used in a language are ambiguous, the language may be understood in two or more different senses. In that event, it becomes necessary to ascertain the true meaning of the ambiguous words. The meaning which will introduce uncertainty, friction or confusion should be rejected and that meaning should be upheld which best effectuates the purpose of the legislation. The ambiguities are of two kinds, viz., Latent ambiguity and Patent ambiguity. Latent ambiguity: This kind of ambiguity is not apparent. Prima facie, the language is explicit but the ambiguity is introduced by evidence of something extrinsic. Patent ambiguity: This kind of ambiguity is apparent. No extrinsic evidence is admissible to deduce the intention. Necessity to interpret a provision—The necessity to interpret a provision arises only if the words employed in the language are ambiguous. But when the words of a statute are clear, plain and precise, the courts are boundTHE MEANING, OBJECT AND NECESSITY OF INTERPRETATION xn to give effect to that meaning. The rules of ini only if there is any doubt with regard to the language used. In case of plain words there is no necessity to invoke any rule to ascertain legislative intent, The court can iron out the creases but it cannot change the texture of the fabric. It cannot enlarge the scope of legislation. It cannot add or subtract words to a statute or read something into it which is not there. It cannot rewrite or recast legislation. terpretation would come into playCHAPTER VI THE PROCESS OF INTERPRETATION SYNOPSIS GRAMMATICAL OR LITERAL INTERPRETATION LIMITATIONS OF GRAMMATICAL OR LITERAL INTERPRETATION Ambiguity Inconsistency Deficiency in the Act itself LOGICAL INTERPRETATION, GRAMMATICALILITERAL AND LOGICAL INTERPRETATION COMPARED GRAMMATICAULITERAL INTERPRETATION TO BE PREFERRED DISCOVERY OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL AN OVERVIEW OF SOME RULES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION Statute to be interpreted in tune with its object Statute should be construed in a manner to carry out legislative intent Statute cannot be given retrospective effect Court cannot add, delete or substitute words or supply to deficiencies of the statute No provision should be interpreted in isolation Interpretation by which statute is turned to nullity should be discarded If the language of a statute is clear, it must be enforced Intention of Legislature is to be primarily gathered from the words used Plain, ordinary and natural meaning to be assigned to the words Meaning of a word depends on the context in which it is used Same words same meaning Words be given that meaning which they bore at the time of enactment Construction of general words Golden Rule Mischief Rule Harmonious Construction Strict and liberal construction CHAPTER SUMMARY We have already seen that one of the basic characteristics of enacted Jaw is its authoritative form. The authority of enacted law lies in its letter or ¥' eet d as well as in its spirit. Hence enacted law requires to be judicially interpret™ in order to derive true legislative intent. SALMOND refers to two kinds of interpretations : @ Grammatical interpretation (86)‘THE PROCESS OF INTERPRETATION 87 (i) Logical interpretation GRAMMATICAL OR LITERAL INTERPRETATION The grammatical interpretatioy v1 i ‘his is considered to be the safest method in deterinand ara construction ambiguous word, In the case of grammatical interpretation, erly the 7 bal expression of law is taken into consideration and the courts do net go bevond what is expressed by words. This dictate of words is known as lira ices The grammatical or literal construction is totally confined to the worde or expressions used in the language of the statute. It does not look beyond what has been stated. The consequence is no consideration. It remains firm on the letter of law even if injustice or hardships is caused. LIMITATIONS OF GRAMMATICAL OR _ LITERA INTERPRETATION = Following defects could cause failure of grammatical interpretation : (i) Ambiguity: The language of a statute may be open to two or more meanings due to uncertainty of its words. If the words used in the provision are imprecise and can reasonably bear meanings more than one, then rule of literal or grammatical construction ceases to be sure guide to reach real legislative intent. In such a case, the courts may step out of strict grammatical interpretation and go behind the letter of the law to find the true intention of the Legislature. The courts may also call in aid other well recognized rules of construction such as legislative history, the basic scheme and framework of the statute as a whole, each portion throwing light on the rest, the purpose of legislation, the object sought to be achieved and the consequences that may follow from the adoption of one in preference to other possible interpretation. The courts would then adopt that interpretation which advances the object of law. (ii) Inconsistency : The different sections of the enactment may be inconsistent with each another. Due to this, either their meaning is nullified or one section loses its effect. In such a case, the courts are duty bound to find out the true intention of the Legislature but the same may not be possible through grammatical interpretation. Gii) Deficiency in the Act itself : ‘There may be some lacuna in the law itself which may not allow the whole meaning to be expressed. Such a defect can be remedied only by recourse to logical interpretation. The grammatical interpretation may be of no help. However, the omissid in the law must be such as to make it incomplete logically. Tf law is logically complete, the courts have no business to interfere with the same. Their duty is merely to apply the letter of the law and not to alter the same. They are not entitled to assume legislative powers.88 INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES LOGICAL INTERPRETATION Logical interpretation lays more emphasis on deriving the true spirit a law i.e., sententia legis, even by traveling beyond what words reflect, Tf the words used in the language of a statute are unable to bring out intention o¢ Legislature, the courts are at liberty to depart from the letter of the law in search of true intention. Logical interpretation is to be put on a statute only when grammatical or literal interpretation is not possible. In such cases, the true intention of the Legislature has to be found out by referring to other facts, According to GRAY, “Logical interpretation calls for the comparison of the statute with other statutes and with the whole system of law and for the consideration of the term and circumstances in which the statute was Passed”, The logical method takes into consideration the historical facts and the needs of society. It is the duty of the court to consider the circumstances under which the law was passed and the mischief which it intended to remedy. Only that interpretation should be put which suppresses the mischief and help the cause of remedy. GRAMMATICAL/LITERAL AND LOGICAL INTERPRETATION COMPARED The grammatical interpretation proceeds on the premise that when Legislature has enacted a law, there has to be a clear object and definite purpose behind it which must be reflected in precise words and plain language of the enactment. It would be absolutely illogical to say that the Legislature has chosen improper and wrong words or has knowingly employed ambiguous words in the language so as to create confusion as to its meaning. It would also be rubbish to decipher that Legislature actually wanted to convey something different from what the language gives out. It would also be wrong to conclude that Legislature being unaware of English language has committed mistake in employing certain expressions that render the language meaningless. Thus the obvious presumption is that the Legislature has used appropriate words to unfold its intention. Having this presumption in mind, there is no need for the court to probe beyond those words. Whatever the words reveal must be taken as legislative intent because those words have been employed by the Legislature itself to open its mind and Legislature is not expected to have used the improper or ambiguous words, On the other hand, the logical interpretation is based on the theory that if the words used in the language are uncertain in meaning and give out several meanings, then it will be legitimate to Peep through the words to discover the true legislative intent. It believes that sometimes the words do suffer from ambiguity and as such are unable to reflect the true intention. Hence, the voyage to discover the intention should not be restricted to words alone, particularly when the words are open to several meanings. The essence of the law lies in its spirit, not in its letter. The letter is significant only as being the external manifestation of the intention that underlies it, Therefore, restricting to words alone actually amounts to seeing the skin and missing the soul.‘THE PROCESS OF INTERPRETATION GRAMMATICAL/LITERAL : PREFERRED INTERPRETATION TO BE No doubt can be raised as to duty of Legislature and act upon it. But in as a Abia eens the dictate of the words as the exclusive and conch ie ees must accept legislative intent. In other words, courts must content th ae the grammatical interpretation as the true intenti Hana by accepting Generally, the courts must take it for granted that the Lega ee are what it meant and meant what it has said. Courts are not a Tene has said or take from or modify the letter of the law, simply beeauee ther ne’ £0 204 t0 beea believe that the true intention is not correctly expressed by foo. According to LORD BROUGHAM, “The construction of an Act must be taken from the bare words of the Act. We cannot fish out what possibly ma: have been the intention of the Legislature. We cannot aid the Legislature's defective phrasing of the statute. We cannot add and mend and by construction make up deficiencies which are left there. And, therefore, if any other meaning was intended than that which the words purport plainly to import, then let another Act”. 89 LORD WENSLEYDALE says, “In construing statutes, as in considering all other written instruments, the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words is to be adhered to, unless that would lead to some absurdity or some repugnance or inconsistency with the rest of the instrument in which case the grammatical and ordinary sense of the words may be modified so as to avoid that absurdity and inconsistency, but no further”. DISCOVERY OF LEGISLATIVE INTENT IS THE ULTIMATE GOAL The sole purpose of interpretation is to discover what the Legislature intended. If the words of the statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous, then no more can be necessary than to expound words in their natural and ordinary sense because the words themselves alone, in such cases, best declare the intention of the law-giver. Thus, where the words used in the language are clear and precise and suffer with no ambiguity, the legislative intent has to be gathered from the language itself. But where the words fail to reveal the true intention due to uncertainty in meaning, the courts can legitimately look beyond the words. The ultimate goal is to derive the intention of Legislature, whichever method of interpretation is adopted. In Union of India v. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama,' referred to in Manik Lal Majumdar v. Gouranga Chandra Dey,? the Supreme Court has held that the paramount object in statutory interpretation is to discover what the Legislature intended. Such intention is primarily to be ascertained from the text of the enactment in question and if the strict grammatical interpretation leads to absurdity or inconsistency, co a a discard such interpretation and adopt an interpretation, which will give effect to purpose of legislation. 1. (1990) 1 SCC 277. 2. (2004) 12 SCC 448.‘Thus the conventional way of interpreting a statute is to seek the ing of its makers, If a statutory provision is open to more than one interpregatn then the court has to adopt that interpretation which represents the intention of the Legislature. But a construction resulting into hard true inconvenience, injustice, absurdity or anomaly or which leads to neo eh or uncertainty and friction in the system has to be rejected. teney Tt cannot be denied that both the grammatical and loy gical interpre are equally important. They are like TPretatio, two footsteps required for an the road. The help of both of them is necessary for interpreting ota SALMOND says, “The maintenance of just balanee between the eee claims of these two forms of interpretations is one of the most importay clements in the administration of statute law. On each side there ane danger to be avoided. Undue laxity on one hand sacrifices the certainty and water” > F none | niformit, of the law to the arbitrary discretion of the judges which administe. it, while undue strictness on the other hand sacrifices the intent of the Legislature ang the rational development of the law to the tyranny of words.” In Karnataka State Financial Corpn. v. N. Narasimahaiah," the Supreme Court held that for interpreting a statute in a reasonable manner, the court must place itself in the chair of a reasonable legislator/author and attempt to be made to pose questions as to (i) why one provision has been amended and the other was not, and (ii) why one terminology has been used while inserting 2 tutory provision and a different clause in another. -AN OVERVIEW OF SOME RULES OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION There are various rules of interpretation that are followed by the courts to determine the literary meaning of a statute. These rules are not enacted law, rather are rough principles or guides evolved by courts themselves. For instance, to ascertain the ordinary meaning of a word ina statute the court may refer dictionaries or text books. Court must also interpret statutory words in the light of definitions provided in the statute itself and by any judicial decisions on the statute in question. Some important rules of statutory interpretation are briefly discussed in succeeding paragraphs, In B. Premanand v. Mohan Koikal,? it was held that the principles of interpretation are not principles of law but are only a methodology for explaining meaning of words used in a text. Therefore, any system of interpretation can be utilized to resolve a difficulty. (a) Statute to be interpreted in tune with its object Legislature enacts a law with a definite purpose. The object and ea of the Act is required to he advanced in order to achieve its goal. er \ possibility of more than one construction owing to ambiguity, the a al which fulfils or furthers the object of the statute in question must be aad be The interpretation which will defeat or frustrate the purpose of aw 0 rejected. : AIR 2008 SC 1797. | 008) 5 SCC 176: All e corn) 40 266 : AIR 2011 SC 1926. i |‘YS699 UF INTERPRETATION ‘According to LORD CAVE, “I bas ee of the statute and upon the lange eon On th lly referred.” © language of the icine aaa fave ccording to CHANNE ae aed indealing with ee J., “It is always neces statute @ & with the words you find in it to consiges hone which the statute was passed, it enables one to und i consider the object with words introduced into the enactment.” nderstand the meaning of the p) Statute should be construed i e intent in a manner to carr, Legislature uses certain langu: Face aly source of the intention of Legislature, Therefore feet a eeage isthe primarily gathered from the language of the ae ae ce Mal Wf the words| of the statute exe sulBidgstin close terre ee ihergelves unfold the intention of Legislature. In such caoee, the words sheela te given effect to by assigning natural and ordinary ‘meaning to ee Bat ehee the words are ambiguous, the courts have to construe them and aooertain their meaning so that the same can be effectuated. If alternative constructions are poi ible, then that interpretation should be preferred by which the legislative intent is carried out. The fundamental rule of interpretation is that a statute is to be expounded “according to the intent of them that made it”. LORD BLACKBURN says, “I quite agree that in construing an Act of Parliament, we are to see what is the intention which the Legislature has expressed by the words, but then the words again are to be understood by looking at the subject-matter they are speaking of and the object of the Legislature, and the words used with reference to that may convey an intention quite different from what the self same set of words used in reference to another et to circumstances and another object would or might have produced.” ‘According to LORD RADCLIFFE, “There are many. so-called rules of construction that courts of law have resorted to in their interpretation of statutes, but the paramount rule remains that every statute is to be expounded according to its manifest and expressed intention”. y out legislative ective effect law can be retrospectively given in the statute itself. (c) Statute cannot be given retrosP! The general rule of interpretation 1s that no k operated unless a specific intention to that effect is Bs Ordinarily all lawe are considered to be prospective 9 According to SCRUTTON, LJ. “Prima facie aa Act eae not with the past events. If this were nots. is a acquired, while the presumption js against the 1! Js with future and J rights already tion is more firmly struct WRIGHT, J. observed, “Perhaps n° rule of omy ig not to be given t 8 established than this, that a retrospect CT, otherwise than regards ; ment or obligation, OM rT out doing statute so as to impair an exis be av é a matter of procedure, unless Violence to the language of the en retation, j language that is fainly capable of ether interpr 88 prospective only”. expressed in trued