Tuesday, 24 May 2016
Wednesday, 20 January 2016
CARDINAL RULES OF INTERPRETATION
CARDINAL RULES OF INTERPRETATION
The rules of interpretation are soul of arid body of legislation.
With respect to modern principles of interpretation, Indian Courts have evolved number of rules of interpretation which can help them to resolve any sort of difficulty. These rules have major role to play in proper and beneficial implementation of law under the garb of different rule, expressions of interpretation. But before detailed discussion upon rules and expressions, it is important to keep in mind that to interpret any statute, three basic rules or processes are to be followed. These processes are:
1) Primary Rule of Interpretation:
This rule has following steps involved which an interpreter has to follow:
a. Read and analyze a section;
b. Ascertain the primary meaning of the words used;
c. Ascertain the grammatical, literal and plain meaning of the words used in the section.
This rule has further been explained in detail in the name of ‘literal rule of interpretation’ in the subsequent submission.
2) Secondary Rule of Interpretation:
This rule is basically states about application of internal and external aids to ensure proper interpretation of statute. Application of Internal and External aids has been explained in the subsequent submission.
3) Final Rule of Interpretation:
Interpretation of every statute must be based upon the aforesaid primary and secondary rules. But there may be a situation when conflict may arise on simultaneous application of above rules, to avoid such conflict, final rule i.e. principle of harmonious construction come into picture. This rule has further been explained in the subsequent submission. Every effort should be made to ensure that all the primary and secondary rules are simultaneously satisfied.[17]
Here, it is also to be focus that certain specific statutes have specific pattern of Interpretation as enumerated in numerous case laws. To illustrate this point, following submission is important.
1) For Penal Statute, it is always need to have a strict interpretation[18] and with respect to mens rea it is always presumed that it is required to prove in each case unless the statute specifically provides for the absence of the same;
In the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. Nagoti Venkataramana[19] , it has been held by the Supreme Court that in the interpretation of penal provisions, strict construction is required to be adopted and if any real doubt arises, necessarily the reasonable benefit of doubt would be extended to the accused.
2) For Beneficial Statute such as Statutes related to Industry/workmen, it is always important to have beneficial liberal interpretation[20]. Presently, in the period of social welfare legislation, beneficial interpretation has become important tool of interpretation of statute.
In the case of Secretary, H.S.E.B v. Suresh & Ors Etc.[21] it has been held by the SC that the Contract Labour Regulation Act being a beneficial piece of legislation as engrafted in the statute book, ought to receive the widest possible interpretation in regard to the words used and unless words are taken to their maximum amplitude, it would be a violent injustice to the framers of the law.
3) For Constitution, the basic spirit in form of social justice, equity fraternity etc. should run throughout the interpretation[22] and the interpretation of the Constitutional provisions should be harmonious and liberal;
In the Case of Menaka Gandhi v. Union of India[23], the Supreme Court widened the protection of life and liberty contemplated by Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court ruled that the mere existence of an enabling law was not enough to restrain personal liberty. Such a law must also be just, fair and reasonable. This wider interpretation ensured inclusion of many rights under Article 21.
4) For Taxing Statute, Statutes imposing taxes or monetary burdens are to strictly construe. The logic behind this principle is that imposition of taxes is also a kind of imposition of penalty which can only be imposed if the language of the statute clearly says so; [24] in many instances, liberal or beneficial interpretation has an important role to play in taxing statute’s interpretation.
In the case of, Calcutta Jute Manufacturing Co. v Commercial Tax officer[25] the Supreme Court held that in case of interpreting a taxing statute, one has to look into what is clearly stated. There is no room of searching the intentions, presumptions.
Apart from above brief submissions on interpretation of different statutes, many types of Internal and External aids are used for the purpose of interpretation of statute. The term internal aid is defined as interpretation of statute with those means which are found within the text of the statutes.[26] For example:Preambles, Definitional sections and clauses, Provisos, Explanations etc.
References:
[17](2006)12 SCC 583
[18]M. Narayanan Nambiar v. State of Kerala, 1963 SCR Supl. (2) 724
[19]1996 (6) SCC 409.
[20]Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT, 196 ITR 188 (SC)
[21]1999 3 SCC 601
[22]Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461
[23]AIR 1978 SC 597
[24]CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyyengar (1975) 101 ITR 764 (SC)
[25]AIR 1997 SC 2920
[26]Law Commission , A continuum on the General Clauses Act, 1897 with special reference to the admissibility and codification of external aids to interpretation of statutes {Law Comm. No. 6(3)(79)/2002-LC(LS), 2002}para 8.
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Interpretation-of-Statute-5430.asp#.Vp8jIpp97VQ
The rules of interpretation are soul of arid body of legislation.
With respect to modern principles of interpretation, Indian Courts have evolved number of rules of interpretation which can help them to resolve any sort of difficulty. These rules have major role to play in proper and beneficial implementation of law under the garb of different rule, expressions of interpretation. But before detailed discussion upon rules and expressions, it is important to keep in mind that to interpret any statute, three basic rules or processes are to be followed. These processes are:
1) Primary Rule of Interpretation:
This rule has following steps involved which an interpreter has to follow:
a. Read and analyze a section;
b. Ascertain the primary meaning of the words used;
c. Ascertain the grammatical, literal and plain meaning of the words used in the section.
This rule has further been explained in detail in the name of ‘literal rule of interpretation’ in the subsequent submission.
2) Secondary Rule of Interpretation:
This rule is basically states about application of internal and external aids to ensure proper interpretation of statute. Application of Internal and External aids has been explained in the subsequent submission.
3) Final Rule of Interpretation:
Interpretation of every statute must be based upon the aforesaid primary and secondary rules. But there may be a situation when conflict may arise on simultaneous application of above rules, to avoid such conflict, final rule i.e. principle of harmonious construction come into picture. This rule has further been explained in the subsequent submission. Every effort should be made to ensure that all the primary and secondary rules are simultaneously satisfied.[17]
Here, it is also to be focus that certain specific statutes have specific pattern of Interpretation as enumerated in numerous case laws. To illustrate this point, following submission is important.
1) For Penal Statute, it is always need to have a strict interpretation[18] and with respect to mens rea it is always presumed that it is required to prove in each case unless the statute specifically provides for the absence of the same;
In the case of State of Andhra Pradesh v. Nagoti Venkataramana[19] , it has been held by the Supreme Court that in the interpretation of penal provisions, strict construction is required to be adopted and if any real doubt arises, necessarily the reasonable benefit of doubt would be extended to the accused.
2) For Beneficial Statute such as Statutes related to Industry/workmen, it is always important to have beneficial liberal interpretation[20]. Presently, in the period of social welfare legislation, beneficial interpretation has become important tool of interpretation of statute.
In the case of Secretary, H.S.E.B v. Suresh & Ors Etc.[21] it has been held by the SC that the Contract Labour Regulation Act being a beneficial piece of legislation as engrafted in the statute book, ought to receive the widest possible interpretation in regard to the words used and unless words are taken to their maximum amplitude, it would be a violent injustice to the framers of the law.
3) For Constitution, the basic spirit in form of social justice, equity fraternity etc. should run throughout the interpretation[22] and the interpretation of the Constitutional provisions should be harmonious and liberal;
In the Case of Menaka Gandhi v. Union of India[23], the Supreme Court widened the protection of life and liberty contemplated by Article 21 of the Constitution. The Court ruled that the mere existence of an enabling law was not enough to restrain personal liberty. Such a law must also be just, fair and reasonable. This wider interpretation ensured inclusion of many rights under Article 21.
4) For Taxing Statute, Statutes imposing taxes or monetary burdens are to strictly construe. The logic behind this principle is that imposition of taxes is also a kind of imposition of penalty which can only be imposed if the language of the statute clearly says so; [24] in many instances, liberal or beneficial interpretation has an important role to play in taxing statute’s interpretation.
In the case of, Calcutta Jute Manufacturing Co. v Commercial Tax officer[25] the Supreme Court held that in case of interpreting a taxing statute, one has to look into what is clearly stated. There is no room of searching the intentions, presumptions.
Apart from above brief submissions on interpretation of different statutes, many types of Internal and External aids are used for the purpose of interpretation of statute. The term internal aid is defined as interpretation of statute with those means which are found within the text of the statutes.[26] For example:Preambles, Definitional sections and clauses, Provisos, Explanations etc.
References:
[17](2006)12 SCC 583
[18]M. Narayanan Nambiar v. State of Kerala, 1963 SCR Supl. (2) 724
[19]1996 (6) SCC 409.
[20]Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT, 196 ITR 188 (SC)
[21]1999 3 SCC 601
[22]Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461
[23]AIR 1978 SC 597
[24]CIT v. T.V. Sundaram Iyyengar (1975) 101 ITR 764 (SC)
[25]AIR 1997 SC 2920
[26]Law Commission , A continuum on the General Clauses Act, 1897 with special reference to the admissibility and codification of external aids to interpretation of statutes {Law Comm. No. 6(3)(79)/2002-LC(LS), 2002}para 8.
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/Interpretation-of-Statute-5430.asp#.Vp8jIpp97VQ
Rule of harmonious construction
Rule of harmonious construction
This rule is the final and the most important rule of interpretation. As submitted earlier, Judicial believe is every statute with every provision has some reason of enactment so the courts while interpreting must try to avoid a conflict between the provisions of Statute. It may be possible that different sections may appear to mean contrary to each other or contradicting each other. Under such circumstances, an attempt should be made to reconcile the provisions of the Act and an effect should be made to give the effect to both the apparently contradictory provisions. Thereby a head on clash between sections of the Act is avoided. This is known as harmonious construction. The rule of reconciliation on the Entries was propounded for the first time in the case of In re C.P. and Bera Act [1].
Along with these rules, there are certain maxims and terms whose expressions play an important role in interpretation of statute. A brief discussion about some of these maxims as well as terms is as follows.
References:
[1]AIR 1939 FC 1
This rule is the final and the most important rule of interpretation. As submitted earlier, Judicial believe is every statute with every provision has some reason of enactment so the courts while interpreting must try to avoid a conflict between the provisions of Statute. It may be possible that different sections may appear to mean contrary to each other or contradicting each other. Under such circumstances, an attempt should be made to reconcile the provisions of the Act and an effect should be made to give the effect to both the apparently contradictory provisions. Thereby a head on clash between sections of the Act is avoided. This is known as harmonious construction. The rule of reconciliation on the Entries was propounded for the first time in the case of In re C.P. and Bera Act [1].
Along with these rules, there are certain maxims and terms whose expressions play an important role in interpretation of statute. A brief discussion about some of these maxims as well as terms is as follows.
References:
[1]AIR 1939 FC 1
Foreign decisions
Foreign decisions
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.
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.
Parliamentary history
Parliamentary history
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 in 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 these with 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. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126 [4] 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. (Para 33)
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 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) [5]
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) [6]
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 [7] considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
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 in 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 these with 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. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126 [4] 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. (Para 33)
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 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) [5]
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) [6]
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 [7] considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
'Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions'as aid of interpretation
'Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions'as aid of interpretation
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. It is, 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 harmonise the law with the prevailing concepts and values and make it an effective instrument for delivery of justice.” (Para 62)
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.
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. It is, 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 harmonise the law with the prevailing concepts and values and make it an effective instrument for delivery of justice.” (Para 62)
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.
External aids to construction of statutes
External aids to construction of statutes
When internal aids are not adequate, court has to take recourse to External aids. External Aids may be parliamentary material, historical background, reports of a committee or a commission, official statement, dictionary meanings, foreign decisions, etc.
B. Prabhakar Rao and others v State of A.P. and others, AIR 1986 SC 120 [1] O.Chennappa, Reddy J. has observed : “Where internal aids are not forthcoming, we can always have recourse to external aids to discover the object of the legislation. External aids are not ruled out. This is now a well settled principle of modern statutory construction.” (para 7)
District Mining Officer and others v Tata Iron & Steel Co. and another, (2001) 7 SCC 358 [2] Supreme Court has observed: “It is also a cardinal principle of construction that external aids are brought in by widening the concept of context as including not only other enacting provisions of the same statute, but its preamble, the existing state of law, other statutes in pari materia and the mischief which the statute was intended to remedy.” (para 18)
K.P. Varghese v Income Tax Officer Ernakulam, AIR 1981 SC 1922 [3] The Supreme Court has stated that interpretation of statute being an exercise in the ascertainment of meaning, everything which is logically relevant should be admissible.
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.
Some of the external aids used in the interpretation of statutes are as follows:
a. 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 in 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 these with 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. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126 [4] 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. (Para 33)
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 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) [5]
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) [6]
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 [7] considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
b. Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions
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, [8] 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. It is, 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 harmonise the law with the prevailing concepts and values and make it an effective instrument for delivery of justice.” (Para 62)
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.
c. 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 unrepealed part.
For the purpose of interpretation or construction of a statutory provision, courts can refer 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 of statutes 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.
d. 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.
e. 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.
f. Other materials
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. [9] 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.
REFERENCES:
[1] B. Prabhakar Rao and others v State of A.P. and others, AIR 1986 SC 120
[2] District Mining Officer and others v Tata Iron & Steel Co. and another, (2001) 7 SCC 358
[3] K.P. Varghese v Income Tax Officer Ernakulam, AIR 1981 SC 1922
[4] S.R. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126
[5] (K.S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and others, AIR 1995 SC 1012)
[6] Devadoss (dead) by L. Rs, v. Veera Makali Amman Koil Athalur, AIR 1998 SC 750
[7] Rosy and another v State of Kerala and others, (2000) 2 SCC 230
[8] S.P. Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149
[9] Ramlal v State of Rajasthan, (2001) 1 SCC 175
http://www.caaa.in/Image/Interpretation%20of%20Statutes.pdf
When internal aids are not adequate, court has to take recourse to External aids. External Aids may be parliamentary material, historical background, reports of a committee or a commission, official statement, dictionary meanings, foreign decisions, etc.
B. Prabhakar Rao and others v State of A.P. and others, AIR 1986 SC 120 [1] O.Chennappa, Reddy J. has observed : “Where internal aids are not forthcoming, we can always have recourse to external aids to discover the object of the legislation. External aids are not ruled out. This is now a well settled principle of modern statutory construction.” (para 7)
District Mining Officer and others v Tata Iron & Steel Co. and another, (2001) 7 SCC 358 [2] Supreme Court has observed: “It is also a cardinal principle of construction that external aids are brought in by widening the concept of context as including not only other enacting provisions of the same statute, but its preamble, the existing state of law, other statutes in pari materia and the mischief which the statute was intended to remedy.” (para 18)
K.P. Varghese v Income Tax Officer Ernakulam, AIR 1981 SC 1922 [3] The Supreme Court has stated that interpretation of statute being an exercise in the ascertainment of meaning, everything which is logically relevant should be admissible.
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.
Some of the external aids used in the interpretation of statutes are as follows:
a. 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 in 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 these with 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. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126 [4] 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. (Para 33)
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 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) [5]
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) [6]
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 [7] considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
b. Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions
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, [8] 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. It is, 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 harmonise the law with the prevailing concepts and values and make it an effective instrument for delivery of justice.” (Para 62)
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.
c. 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 unrepealed part.
For the purpose of interpretation or construction of a statutory provision, courts can refer 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 of statutes 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.
d. 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.
e. 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.
f. Other materials
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. [9] 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.
REFERENCES:
[1] B. Prabhakar Rao and others v State of A.P. and others, AIR 1986 SC 120
[2] District Mining Officer and others v Tata Iron & Steel Co. and another, (2001) 7 SCC 358
[3] K.P. Varghese v Income Tax Officer Ernakulam, AIR 1981 SC 1922
[4] S.R. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC 126
[5] (K.S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and others, AIR 1995 SC 1012)
[6] Devadoss (dead) by L. Rs, v. Veera Makali Amman Koil Athalur, AIR 1998 SC 750
[7] Rosy and another v State of Kerala and others, (2000) 2 SCC 230
[8] S.P. Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149
[9] Ramlal v State of Rajasthan, (2001) 1 SCC 175
http://www.caaa.in/Image/Interpretation%20of%20Statutes.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)