Ios 2

Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies
&
School of Law
An ISO 9001:2015 Certified Quality Institute
(Recognized by Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Affiliated to GGS Indraprastha University, Delhi& Approved by Bar Council of India)
E-NOTES
Class : B.A.LL.B VIII Semester
Paper Code : LLB 406
Subject : Interpretation of Statutes
UNIT-3
External Aid to Interpretation

Introduction
When internal aids are not adequate, court has to take recourse to external aids. The external
aids are very useful tools for the interpretation or construction of statutory provisions. As
opposed to internal aids to construction there are certain aids which are external to the statute.
Such aids will include parliamentary history of the legislation, historical facts and
surrounding circumstances in which the statute came to be enacted, reference to other statutes,
use of dictionaries, use of foreign decisions, etc.
While interpreting a statute true intent of the legislature shall have to be gathered and deciphered
in its proper spirit having due regard to the language used therein. Where language is clear,
external aid for construction is not required. External aids are relevant only when the language is
not clear and two meanings are possible. Factual events contemporaneous to the time of
interpretation cannot be taken into consideration for interpretation of a statute.
The Supreme Court held in a case that the approach of High Court in interpreting the
Development Control Regulations having regard to certain other factors, namely, the deluge in
Bombay in 2005 as also the requirements of the entire population of Bombay from environmental
aspect was erroneous. It was held that such factors cannot be taken into consideration for
interpretation of a statute.
Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Ph: 91-11-27284333 / 34. Toll Free No. : 1800117677. Website: www.cpj.edu.in. E-mail: cpj.chs@gmail.com
&
School of Law
Some of the external aids used in the interpretation of statutes are as follows:
Parliamentary History, Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances
Historical setting cannot be used as an aid if the words are plain and clear. If the wordings are
ambiguous, the historical setting may be considered in order to arrive at the proper construction.
Historical setting covers parliamentary history, historical facts, statement of objects and reasons,
report of expert committees. Parliamentary history means the process by which an act is enacted.
This includes conception of an idea, drafting of the bill, the debates made, the amendments
proposed etc. Speech made by mover of the bill, amendments considered during the progress of
the bill are considered in parliamentary history where as the papers placed before the cabinet
which took the decision for the introduction of the bill are not relevant since these papers are not
placed before the parliament.
The historical facts of the statute that is the external circumstances in which it was enacted in
should also be taken into note so that it can be understood that the statute in question was
intended to alter the law or leave it where it stood. Statement of objective and reasons as to why
the statute is being brought to enactment can also be a very helpful fact in the research for
historical facts, but the same if done after extensive amendments in statute it may be unsafe to
attach thesewith the statute in the end. It is better to use the report of a committee before
presenting it in front of the legislature as they guide us with a legislative intent and place their
recommendations which come in handy while enactment of the bill.
The Supreme Court in a numbers of cases referred to debates in the Constituent Assembly for
interpretation of Constitutional provisions. Recently, the Supreme Court in S.R. Chaudhari v
State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126 has stated that it is a settled position that debates
in the Constituent Assembly may be relied upon as an aid to interpret a Constitutional provision
because it is the function of the Court to find out the intention of the framers of the Constitution.
But as far as speeches in Parliament are concerned, a distinction is made between speeches of the
mover of the Bill and speeches of other Members. Regarding speeches made by the Members of
&
School of Law
the Parliament at the time of consideration of a Bill, it has been held that they are not admissible
as extrinsic aids to the interpretation of the statutory provision. However, speeches made by the
mover of the Bill or Minister may be referred to for the purpose of finding out the object
intended to be achieved by the Bill. (K.S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and others, AIR 1995
SC 1012)
So far as Statement of Objects and Reasons, accompanying a legislative bill is concerned, it is

permissible to refer to it for understanding the background, the antecedent state of affairs, the
surrounding circumstances in relation to the statute and the evil which the statute sought to
remedy. But, it cannot be used to ascertain the true meaning and effect of the substantive
provision of the statute. (Devadoss (dead) by L. Rs, v. Veera Makali Amman Koil Athalur, AIR
1998 SC 750.)
The leading authorities do not provide a precise meaning of the term “legislative history.”
Generally, the term is used to denote documents relating to events that occurred during the
conception, preparation, and passage of the enactment.
Peter Hogg considers legislative history to include the following materials:
1. The report of a royal commission or law reform commission or parliamentary committee
recommending that a statute be enacted;
2. A government policy paper (whether called a white paper, green paper, budget paper or
whatever) recommending that a statute be enacted;
3. A report or study produced outside government which existed at the time of the enactment of
the statute and was relied upon by the government that introduced the legislation;
4. Earlier versions of the statute, either before or after its introduction into Parliament or the
Legislature;
5. Statements by ministers or members of Parliament and testimony of expert witnesses before a
parliamentary committee charged with studying the bill; and
6. Speeches in the Parliament or Legislature when the bill is being debated.
Absent from the foregoing list are explanatory memoranda which are documents explaining
the contents and objects of the bill to members of the house- frequently used in some common

&
School of Law
law jurisdictions, such as Australia. These materials are also considered to be part of
legislative history.
The parliamentary procedure is similar across most common law jurisdictions, except for the
United States. After the draft legislation has been accepted by the government, it is introduced in
the Parliament. It then proceeds through the normal stages of first and second readings, a
reference to committee, report stage, and final reading of the bill.
House members’ commentary on the bill during the three readings is recorded in Hansard, the
official reporter of parliamentary debates. The vast majority of drafts are public bills introduced
by the government; there are also private bills and private members’ bills.
It is noteworthy that speeches in Parliament on a statute made subsequent to its enactment — such
as parliamentary statements during the debate on an unsuccessful amendment to the statute —
cannot be considered part of its legislative history. Such speeches did not occur during the
enactment and are not antecedent to the crystallization of the words in the statute. Therefore,
although they are recorded in Hansard, they cannot be regarded as parliamentary debates on that
particular legislation.
Legislative history — must be distinguished from the so-called social-science data and other
factual materials that have played no role in the legislative process. Social science data can be
introduced as evidence in certain courts, particularly in the United States, in the form of a
“Brandeis brief.”
They are, however, distinct from (and cannot be considered part of) the legislative history of a
statute. Although they can have bearing on the construction of a statute, social-science data are, in
effect, facts submitted to the general rules of evidence. In contrast, legislative history materials are
not facts — neither adjudicative nor legislative — but rather interpretive aids.
Indian Practice
The Supreme Court has used the aid of Parliamentary history in resolving questions of
&
School of Law
construction but it can be said that the Supreme Court generally has enunciated the said rule of
exclusion of Parliamentary history in the way it was traditionally enunciated by English Courts.
But in a few cases, it has been held that the legislative history within circumspect limits may not
be consulted by the Courts in resolving ambiguities. Legislative history and precedent English
statutes may be taken into consideration in giving a beneficent interpretation to a provision in an
act. In determining legislative intent, even a minister’s budget speech was taken into
consideration.
BILL: As the speeches made by the members of the Constitution Assembly in the course of
debates on the draft Constitution cannot be admitted as an external aid to the Constitution, in the
same way, the debates on a Bill in Parliament are not admissible for construction of the Act which
is ultimately enacted.
In State of Travancore v Bombay Co Ltd, it was held that a speech made in the course of the
debate on a bill could at best be indicative of the subjective intent of the speaker, but it could not
reflect the inarticulate mental process lying behind the majority vote which carried the bill. Nor is
it reasonable to assume that the minds of all those legislators were in accord.
In Chiranjit Lal Chowdhary v Union of India, Fazal Ali, J, admitted Parliamentary history
including the speech of the Minister introducing the Bill as evidence of the circumstances which
necessitated the passing of the Act, a course apparently approved in later decisions.
In Union of India v Harbhajan Singh, extensive references were made to speeches in the
Constituent Assembly to support the construction that wealth-tax on net-wealth including the
capital value of agricultural lands fell within the residuary power of the Parliament.
In Indira Sawhney v Union of India, the Supreme Court referred to Dr. Ambedkar’s speech in the
Constituent Assembly and observed interpreting Article 16 (4), ‘that the debates in the Constituent
Assembly could be relied upon as an aid to interpretation of a constitutional provision is borne out
&
School of Law
by a series of decisions of the Court.’
Since the expression backward classes of citizens are not defined in the Constitution, the reference
to such debates is permissible to ascertain at any rate the context, background, and objective behind
them. Particularly where the courts want to ascertain the ‘original intent’ such reference may be
unavoidable.
The amendments considered during the progress of a bill were ruled out as inadmissible for
purposes of construction of the Act. This principle was modified by the Supreme Court in the case
of Express Newspapers (Pvt) Ltd v Union of India.
The Court observed that there is a consensus of opinion that the circumstances under which a
particular word came to be deleted from the original Bill as introduced in the Parliament and the
fact of such deletion when the act to be passed in the final shape are not aids to the construction of
terms of a statute. It is applicable only when the terms of a statute are vague or ambiguous.
In K.S.Paripoornan v State of Kerala, it was held that speeches of members of Parliament are not
admissible as extrinsic aids, although the speech of the mover of the bill can be referred to find out
the object intended to be achieved by the Bill. Similarly, it was held that statements made by a
Minister in the house who had moved the Bill in Parliament could be referred to ascertain the
mischief sought to be remedied by legislation but it could not be relied on for interpreting
provisions of the enactment.
Parliamentary Debates
Parliamentary debates at the time of introduction of bill may be used as an external aid in
interpretation. It is a settled position that there can only be limited use of Parliamentary Debates.
The court should not normally critically analyze the proceedings of Parliament. In Milton v DPP,
in interpreting the term ‘prosecution’ under the Income Tax Act, a minister’s speech at the time of
introduction of Bill has been taken into consideration.
Statement of objects and reasons

&
School of Law
The statement of objects and reasons accompanying a legislative bill cannot be used to ascertain
the true meaning and effects of the substantive provisions of the legislation, but it can certainly be
pressed into service for the limited purpose of understanding the background, the antecedent state
of affairs and the object that the legislation seeks to achieve. If the meaning of the provision of a
statute is clear and explicit, it is not necessary to advert to the objects and reasons thereof.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons is undoubtedly an aid to construction but that by itself
cannot be termed to be and by itself as an aid to the construction of a statute. It is a useful guide but
the interpretations and the intent shall have to be gathered from the entirety of the statute.
In Ashwini Kumar’s case, the statement of Objects and Reasons was ruled out as an aid to the
construction of a statute.
When the validity of a particular statute is brought into question, a limited reference may be made
to the Statement of Objects and Reasons but it may not be relied on. It may be employed for the
purposes of comprehending the factual background, the prior state of legal affairs, the surrounding
circumstances in respect of the statute and the evil which the statute has sought to remedy. It
cannot be the exclusive footing upon which a statute is made a nullity through the decision of a
court of law.
The Statement of Objects and Reasons can be referred only for understanding the background, the
antecedent state of affairs, the surrounding circumstances in relation to the state of affairs, and the
evil which the statute has sought to remedy. It can be referred to only to ascertain conditions
prevailing at the time which prompted the introduction of Bill but where the language of the statute
is clear and plain it is not required to be referred to.
It cannot be utilized for the purpose of restricting and controlling the plain meaning of the language
employed by the legislature in drafting a statute and excluding from its operation such transactions
which it plainly covers. In CIT, MP v Sodra Devi, while dealing with Section 16(3) of the Income
Tax Act 1922 as introduced by the Amending Act IV of 1937, and in construing the words ‘any
individual’ and ‘such individual’ occurring therein, Bhagwati J. restricted their meaning to ‘males’
on a consideration that the statement of objects and reasons appended to the Bill of Amending Act
made it clear that the evil which was sought to be remedied was the one resulting from the
widespread practice of husbands entering into nominal partnerships with their wives and fathers
&
School of Law
admitting their minor children to the benefits of partnerships of which they were members and that
the only intention of the legislature was to include the income derived by the wife or a minor child,
in the computation of total income of the male assessee, the husband or the father, as the case may
be.
In Babu Ram v State of U.P, it was held that the statement of Objects and Reasons can be referred
to ascertain mischief sought to be remedied by the statute.
However, the Statement of Objects and Reasons have never been held admissible for determining
whether a certain provision of the Act, which was ultra vires, was or was not severable from the
other provisions of the Act. A provision inserted by subsequent amendment cannot be construed on
the basis of the statement of objects and reasons of the original statute.
Commission / Committee Reports
Reports of Commissions including Law Commission or Committees including Parliamentary

Committees preceding the introduction of a Bill can also be referred to in the Court as evidence of
historical facts or of surrounding circumstances or of mischief or evil intended to be remedied. Law
Commission’s Reports can also be referred to where a particular enactment or amendment is the
result of recommendations of Law Commission Report.
The Supreme Court in Rosy and another v State of Kerala and others, (2000) 2 SCC 230
considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
Reports of Commissions or Inquiry Committees preceding the introduction of a Bill have also been
referred to as evidence of historical facts or of surrounding circumstances or of mischief or evil
intended to be remedied and at times for interpreting the act. In the Transfer of Property Act,
Section 53 A was inserted on the basis of recommendations of the Special Committee set up by the
Government of India.
Examples can also be taken from Sodra Devi’s Case in which Income Tax Enquiry Report was
referred, in Express Newpaper’s Case where the Press Commissions Report was referred and in

&
School of Law
Madanlal’s Case where the report by Committee appointed to bring changes in Company law was
referred.
In CIT, AP, v Jayalakshmi Rice, and Oil Mills Contractor Co, it was held that the report of the
special committee which had been appointed by the Government of India to examine the provisions
of the Bill which later became the Partnership Act could not be admitted for interpreting the
provisions of the Act.
But a different view was taken in RS Nayak v AR Antuley where the court held that report of the
Committee which preceded the enactment of legislation, reports of Joint Parliamentary Committee
and Report of a Commission set up for collecting information leading to the legislation are
permissible external aids to the construction of the Act.
In M Ismail Faruqqui v Union of India, it was held by the Supreme Court that white paper issued
by the Government detailing the facts leading to enactment of a statute is also admissible for
understanding the background when the court is called upon to interpret and decide the validity of
the statute. In understanding the background of the Babri Masjid dispute, in deciding the reference
made under Article 143 and the constitutionality of the Acquisition of Certain Areas of Ayodhya
Act 1993 extensive reference was made by the Supreme Court to the white paper.
In Samantha v State of Andhra Pradesh, in interpreting para 5(2) of the 5th Schedule of the
Constitution, reports of drafting committee and sub-committees of the Constituent Assembly, the
Draft Constitution and changes made thereafter in giving it the final shape were referred by the
Supreme Court.
However, in Maharani Kusumkumari v Kusumkumari Jadeja, the Law Commissions Report as

an external aid to construction was not relied on.
Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions

&
School of Law
A Statute must be interpreted to include circumstances or situations which were unknown or did
not exist at the time of enactment of the statute. Any relevant changes in the social conditions and
technology should be given due weightage. Courts should take into account all these developments
while construing statutory provisions.
In S.P. Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149, it was stated - “The interpretation of every
statutory provision must keep pace with changing concepts and values and it must, to the extent to
which its language permits or rather does not prohibit, suffer adjustments through judicial
interpretation so as to accord with the requirement of the fast changing society which is
undergoing rapid social and economic transformation. It is elementary that law does not operate
in a vacuum. Itis, therefore, intended to serve a social purpose and it cannot be interpreted without
taking into account the social, economic and political setting in which it is intended to operate. It
is here that the Judge is called upon to perform a creative function. He has to inject flesh and
blood in the dry skeleton provided by the legislature and by a process of dynamic interpretation
invest it with a meaning which will harmonize the law with the prevailing concepts and values
and make it an effectiveinstrument for delivery of justice.”
Therefore, court has to take into account social, political and economic developments and
scientific inventions which take place after enactment of a statute for proper construction of its
provision.
Use of foreign decisions and International Conventions

With the growing interconnectedness of the laws and treaties, Nations are familiarizing themselves
within the international platform by mutually agreeing to cooperate, agree and follow. The text and
interpretations of various international instruments like the UDHR, Geneva Conventions, European
Conventions, etc. are being referred and borrowed by countries from the ones that are party's to the
same.
In this process the judiciary of one country may borrow foreign judicial decisions of other nations
or international adjudicatory bodies to understand how they interpret the treaties a, laws, doctrines,
etc. However, there is not much debate when it comes to the use of foreign judgments as a tool for
&
School of Law
interpretation while referring to international laws but there are reservations when it comes to the
domestic law.
The scientific, social, philosophical and economical changes that happen in a nation are not always
incorporated into or as legislations. To expect such changes to reflect in the legislations would take
a lot of time and often involves, a huge procedure. Hence, we can say that the connection between
the social conditions and the legal standards is not always present. But when a problem arrives at
the doors of justice, the lack of a clear legal solution is not relevant for the judges. In such a case
the judiciary may use the decisions of the foreign Courts where such a conflict or dispute was
resolved. In today’s changing times where very less problems are limited to a single country, which
is likely to have already arisen and been solved in other countries. The foreign decisions may act as
guideposts for the judiciary while deciding the case and the direction it is going in.
Trans Judicial communication can be understood as the communication between the judicial organs
of different nations and organizations across the globe. Anne Slaughter an international lawyer,
political analyst and a political scientist wrote an article on trans-judicial communication in 1994
where she described the three different approaches that a Court can consider to use foreign
precedents:
Vertical means: This approach is used when the courts refer to the decisions given by the
international institutions that adjudicate like the ICC, ICJ, etc. whether or not their countries are in
fact parties to that particular adjudicatory institution functions.
Horizontal means: The domestic courts use the judicial decisions given by other nations to interpret
its own laws. Such borrowing of constitutional cases between the nations will introduce a new line
of thinking.
Mixed horizontal and vertical means: The domestic courts may cite foreign decisions from other
nations with respect to the interpretation of obligations applicable to both the jurisdiction under
international instruments or law.
To understand this in an easier way we can say that the judges directly refer to the applicable
international obligations and are also free to refer to the decisions of the courts of the foreign
nations to understand how those nations interpreting and implementing the obligations are created
&
School of Law
by such international instruments.
These are the three means of trans-judicial communication, by examining these three means one
can notice and understand how the reference to foreign law is contemplated both in international
and national law. More seeds are being sown for more trans-judicial communication because of the
growing trend of internationalization of legal education. One more reason that is attributing to this
communication is the increase in the easy accessibility of foreign legal material for the judges to
refer to.
Over the years Statutory Interpretations has clawed its way into the legal consciousness of the
Indian judiciary. It is often witnessed that the judiciary in India refers to the foreign judgments
given by the Courts of other Nations to construct the statutes in our country. There is no denying
that the major part of law in India has been borrowed from the common law system.
Before independence, it was a common practice that the judiciary would borrow the judgments
decided in England and apply them in India for interpreting statutes. But after independence with
the introduction to our Constitution, the Supreme Court started to lean on and gave more access to
the precedents set by the American and other Courts in the world.
Indian Courts have openly sought for guidance from the foreign decisions in cases where similar
disputes that arose before our Courts were already dealt by foreign Courts. The Indian Constitution
draws inspiration from the Constitutions of many Nations like the United States, Canada, Australia,
etc. When a country’s Supreme Law is inspired from many foreign nations then it is pertinent that
the Indian judiciary would look for guidance from these nations with regard to constitutional
matters from these nations. Ever since the promulgation of the Constitution in the year 1950, the
Indian Courts have often depended on the decisions of other common law jurisdictions/nations.
The Indian Judiciary in some of its most important landmark judgments used a myriad of foreign
decisions to interpret law, introduce doctrines and understand the possibilities of adopting new
ideas of approach.
The following are some of the most prominent judgments that used and discussed about foreign
judicial decisions as an important aid of interpretation:
&
School of Law
The Puttaswami judgment: Justice K S Puttaswami and Others v. Union of India and Others, is a
historic judgment that reaffirmed the right to privacy as a fundamental constitutional right. The
Court in this case held that right to privacy is an integral part of the fundamental rights guaranteed
by the Constitution. The Court even made a comparative analysis of the concept of privacy in other
jurisdictions from comparative law perspective and limited such an analysis to United Kingdoms,
United States, South Africa and Canada.
It also went on to examine the judicial decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights, the
inter-American Court of Human Rights, etc. This probe of the Court was indicative of the fact that
the Apex Court wanted to be thorough with the way in which the concept of right to privacy was
pursued in various places across the globe based on the histories of the societies they govern and
the challenges before them.
Some of the important judicial decisions borrowed from the United Kingdom include Semayne’s
Case, Entrick v. Carrington, Prince Albert v. Strange and a plethora of cases dealing with the
right to privacy right from the 17th century to the current day. From the United States cases from
as early as 1886 to the current day were explored.
For instance Boyd v. United States, Griswold v. Connecticut, United States v. Miller, etc.
While studying the right to privacy in South Africa, the Supreme Court of India though it fit to
refer to cases such as National Media Ltd. v. Jooste where the Court observed that the right to
privacy is an individual condition of life; Bernstein v. Bester and Ors where the Court held that
the scope of privacy can be closely associated or related to the concept of identity; NM and Ors. v.
Smith and Ors., among other cases. Some of the landmark cases referred to from Canada include
Her Majesty, The Queen v. Brandon Roy Dyment, R v. Spencer, etc.
This judgment can essentially serve as a comprehensive document that records historical landmark
cases from foreign countries, international bodies, doctrines and laws related to the privacy laws.
The essence of this decision lies in the fact that the Indian Court was open to referring to foreign
decisions and uses them to guide the Court in the right direction.
Navtej Singh Johar and Ors. v.Union of India: The Supreme Court through this case
&
School of Law
decriminalized homosexuality by saying that the LGBTQ community has the same rights as that of
any ordinary citizen and that sexual orientation is an crucial aspect to privacy. In declaring this
judgment the Apex Court considered the International perspective of this issue and studied the laws
in the United States, Canada, South Africa, United Kingdom and other Courts and Jurisdictions.
The Court specially considered the decisions of the foreign Courts in Law v. Canada, James
Egan and John Norris Nesbit v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada and Anr., Paris
Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, A.R. Coriel v. The Netherlands, etc. where the cases upheld the right
to privacy to individuals and reiterated that the choice of their sexual identity is a very personal
matter.
Moreover in cases like Ashok Kumar Thakur v. Union of India and Others where the Court on
record reiterated the importance of the foreign decisions for interpretation and also the relevance
and applicability of such foreign decisions to the facts and circumstances of the domestic case must
be kept in mind before applying such foreign decision. The Honorable Judge in this case stated
that, the judges in every case must look into the heart of things and regard the facts of every case
concretely much as a jury would do; and yet, not quite as a jury, for we are considering here a
matter of law and not just one of fact; Do these "laws" (foreign judicial decisions) which have been
called in question offend a still greater law before which even they must bow?
In Forasol v. ONGC, General Electric Company v, Renusagar Power Company and many
other landmark cases the Court considered the foreign decisions to have the persuasive value and
used such decisions as a guiding light while treading in new areas of law or existing ones.
While applying foreign judgments to interpret statues or legal aspects, the judiciary must make sure
that the facts of the judgment being applied are similar to or relevant while using them. A blind
application of a foreign judicial decision will be detrimental to the purpose of interpretation.
The judiciary is responsible for the socio-legal developments of the nation. Hence, it must be very
vigilant and aware of the socio legal developments around the globe and must adopt these changes
though the decisions it takes. This is where the foreign judicial decisions come into picture.
&
School of Law
For instance, the LGBTQ+ momentum around the globe influenced the judiciary to recognize the
right of an individual to associate him/herself to a particular gender under Article 21 of the
Constitution, the Court referred to various foreign decisions while deciding this.
The trend of using foreign judgments in the decisions taken by the judiciary in India is followed by
the judiciary at the higher levels of hierarchy and it can be seen that the lower judiciary does not
indulge in using such decisions much comparatively. Though the judiciary at the lower level refers
to the judgments passed by the higher judiciary, its application of such decisions would create an
open mind even at the lower level where the scope to look for different meanings in interpreting
will be high.
Conclusion
The socio-historical context of every country is very different form one another. With the growing
increase in the overwhelming weight of international opinions and the recognition of some rights
and legal aspects by nations is enabling the Judiciary to engage and exchange the methods applied
to solve an issue before the court. This accumulation of wisdom through the system of borrowing
judicial decisions to interpret law is one of the best ways to internationalize the legal system.
The Indian Court’s openness towards accepting or using foreign judicial decisions while
interpreting statues/ law reflects upon the interconnectedness between the legal systems of different
regions. It is important to remember that the foreign judgments have an influential value and are
not obligatory or binding decisions in India; they can act as important guideposts to interpret in
India.
Dictionaries
When a word is not defined in the statute itself, it is permissible to refer to dictionaries to find out
the general sense in which that word is understood in common parlance. However, in the selection
of one out of the various meanings of a word, regard must always be had to the scheme, context
and legislative history.

&
School of Law
Reference to Other Statutes:

In case where two Acts have to be read together, then each part of every act has to be construed as
if contained in one composite Act. However, if there is some clear discrepancy then the latter Act
would modify the earlier. Where a single provision of one Act has to be read or added in another,
then it has to be read in the sense in which it was originally construed in the first Act. In this way
the whole of the first Act can be mentioned or referred in the second Act even though only a
provision of the first one was adopted. In case where an old Act has been repealed, it loses its
operative force. Nevertheless, such a repealed part may still be taken into account for construing
the unrepeated part.
For the purpose of interpretation or construction of a statutory provision, courts canrefer to or can
take help of other statutes. It is also known as statutory aids. The General Clauses Act, 1897 is
an example of statutory aid. The application of this rule of construction has the merit of avoiding
any contradiction between a series ofstatutes dealing with the same subject; it allows the use of an
earlier statute to throw light on the meaning of a phrase used in a later statute in the same context.
On the same logic when words in an earlier statute have received an authoritative exposition by a
superior court, use of same words in similar context in a later statute will give rise to a
presumption that the legislature intends that the same interpretation should be followed for
construction of those words in the later statute.
Judicial Decisions:
When judicial pronouncements are been taken as reference it should be taken into note that the
decisions referred are Indian, if they are foreign it should be ensured that such a foreign country
follows the same system of jurisprudence as ours and that these decisions have been taken in the
ground of the same law as ours. These foreign decisions have persuasive value only and are not
binding on Indian courts and where guidance is available from binding Indian decisions; reference
to foreign decisions is of no use.
Other materials-

&
School of Law
Similarly, Supreme Court used information available on internet for the purpose of interpretation
of statutory provision in Ramlal v State of Rajasthan, (2001) 1 SCC 175. Courts also refer
passages and materials from text books and articles and papers published in the journals. These
external aids are very useful tools not only for the proper and correct interpretation or
construction of statutory provision, but also for understanding the object of the statute, the
mischief sought to be remedied by it, circumstances in which it was enacted and many other
relevant matters. In the absence of the admissibility of these external aids, sometimes court may
not be in a position to do justice in a case.


Ios 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Ios 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ios 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chanderprabhu Jain College of Higher Studies

Class : B.A.LL.B VIII Semester

Paper Code : LLB 406

Subject : Interpretation of Statutes

External Aid to Interpretation

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Parliamentary History, Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances

So far as Statement of Objects and Reasons, accompanying a legislative bill is concerned, it is

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

by a series of decisions of the Court.’

Statement of objects and reasons

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Commission / Committee Reports

Reports of Commissions including Law Commission or Committees including Parliamentary

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

However, in Maharani Kusumkumari v Kusumkumari Jadeja, the Law Commissions Report as

Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Use of foreign decisions and International Conventions

by such international instruments.

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Reference to Other Statutes:

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

Campus: Plot No. OCF, Sector A-8, Narela, Delhi-110040

You might also like