BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION

1.INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE

It is also known as Primary Rule of Interpretation.
The principle holds that the primary goal of statutory interpretation is to
determine what the legislature intended when it passed the law. In fact the aims
and object of a statute is known as intention of the legislature.
When any statute is clear and unambiguous, the courts stated that the inquiry
into legislative intents ends at that particular point. The intention of the
legislature is to be construed when there is a possibility of two interpretations
differently arising and this has to be essentially constructed of two aspects,
1. the concept of meaning i.e what the words mean
2.the concept of purpose and object or the reason and spirit coming through the
statute.
According to Sir John Salmond “The duty of the judicature is to act upon the
true intention of the legislature- the mens or sententia legis”.But finding out
the intention of the legislature is not easy. A judge is not expected to interpret
the provisions of the statute arbitrarily, in order to find out the intention of the
legislature. He has to do the task with the help of established rules of
interpretation, which has been evolved in the course of time or through
understanding the illustrations, explanations, marginal notes given in the statute
itself.

Reasons why this principle finds difficult-

1. Words in any language are not scientific symbols to carry out any precise or
definite meaning.
EX- Co2
We can’t read it as Nitric acid.
2. Language is imperfect medium to convey ones thoughts especially under
various shades of opinion.
EX- Debates, facial expressions, body language.
3. It is impossible for the most imaginative legislature to visualize the situations
exhaustively.
Ex- Counterfeiting of coins
In past there was usual counterfeit of coins, but now there was printing of
counterfeiting coins. The imaginative perspective of legislature cannot visualize
the whole advancement.
4. Functions of courts is only to expound and not to legislate.
Ex- In Vishaka and Hussainara Khatoon cases the judges gave some rules to be
followed in work place and for police working in jail. These were not laws but
these were intentions expounded by judiciary.
5. The legislature becomes “functus officio”.
It is a Latin maxim means ceasing the function. Once the legislature passes a
Bill it becomes functus officio, till another Bill is introduced (amendment).
According to Salmond, “The essence of law lies in the spirit, not in its letter, for
the letter is significant only as being the external manifestation of the intention
that underlies it”.
The importance of this principle can be identified by looking into the statements
made by different Jurists-

Justice Gajendragatkar made the following statement in the case

AIR 2002 SC 1334
“The first and primary rule of construction is that the intention of the legislature
must be found in the words used by the legislature itself.”
Justice Krishna Iyer in the case AIR 1991 SC 1944
“The interpretative effort must be illumined by the goal though guided by the
word.”
“To be literal in the meaning is to see the skin and miss the soul.”
The Higher Judiciary has made the following statement in the case-
Competition Commission of India vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. (2010)
10 SCC 744
“Legislature in a modern State is actuated with some policy to curb an evil
practice or to effectuate some public benefit.”

Justice Chinappa Reddy

“Interpretation must depend on the text and the context.”
EX- Sansar Chand vs. State of Rajasthan
In this case, Sansar chand made huge amount of money out of animal trading.
One day he was caught in possession of instruments for cutting elephant teeth,
animal nails etc.
The matter went to Supreme Court, the counsel contended that according to
criminal law there must be evidence. As the offence was done in the forest they
can’t find any evidence, so through the theory of probability of reasonableness
he was convicted.
They contended that it was our family trade which was protected under Article
19(1) (g). If the legislature makes it as ultra vires to the constitution, then it will
become unconstitutional.
Then the court said that we have to see under which context it was written and
interpret the same.
Kedia Leather and Liquor Ltd. vs state of Madhya Pradesh
Section 133 of CrPC– Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 –
Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 – Maintenance of public
order and tranquillity – Public nuisance
Whether the enactment of the Air Act of 1981 and Water Act of 1974 had the
effect of implied repeal of section 133 of the Code.
Held that section 133 of the Code was in the nature of preventive measure while
the Air and Water Acts were curative, preventive and penal in nature. All the
provisions were mutually exclusive and the question of one replacing the other
does not arise. There was no implied repeal of Section 133 of the Code by the
enactment of the Air and Water Acts and High Court erred in holding that there
was implied repeal.
The Court leans against implying a repeal, “unless two Acts are so plainly
repugnant to each other that effect cannot be given to both at the same time, a
repeal will not be implied, or that there is a necessary inconsistency in the two
Acts standing together.”
The statement of Justice Black Stone was quoted in the case-
AIR 1988 SC 2031
AIR 2001 SC 3134
“The most fair and rational method for interpreting a statute is by exploring the
intention of the legislature through the most natural and probable signs which
are either the words or the context, the subject matter and the reasons for the
law.”
Ex- P.V. Narasimha Rao vs. CBI- interpretation of Article 105
It is a well established rule that legislative intent comes into play only if the
literal rendering of a statute leads to ambiguity or injustice. The Supreme Court
of India has called this formulation the “cardinal rule of construction”. It is
accepted in traditional pedagogy that legislative intent is binding on the courts
in case of ambiguity and forms the basis of statutory construction.

2."Statute must be read as a whole in its context" is the one of the Rules of
Interpretation of a statute.
A statute is written with several sections, exceptions, provisions, explanations,
illustrations, schedules, etc. They are inter-linked with each other. The
Legislature makes the Act with a purpose and object. Legislature intent is
reflected in the statute through its provisions distributed throughout the statute.
The determination of legislative intent is the first duty of the court, it is the
conventional method. For this purpose, the courts read entire statute with
reference to the context.
In the case AIR 2009 SC 1797 it was said that the following five principles
must be followed while reading a statute.
1. Statute as a whole.
2. The previous state of law.
3.Other statutes in pari materia.
4. The general scope of the statute.
5. The mischief that it was intended to remedy.

2. The intention of the Legislature can be found by reading the statute as a

whole. The rule is referred to as an "elementary rule", or a "compelling rule", a
"settled rule". One must look at the whole instrument when there is inaccuracy
and inconsistency in any part of the Instrument.

3. C. Sinha, says "The Court must ascertain the intention of the Legislature by
directing its attention not merely to the clauses to be construed but to the entire
statute".

Case Law:
While disposing Surendra vs. Nabakrishna, the Orissa Hight court held: "By
Context" is meant not only the textual context arising out of the other provisions
of the statute, but also factual context including the mischief to be remedied,
and the circumstances under which the statute was passed. But for such
restriction a compelling reason must be found."

4. Every clause and every section should be understood with reference to the
context, and the other clauses of the Act. The reason is that words do not always
retain their abstract or primary definition and their meanings vary in accordance
with the contextual use. When we read them, we find that they would get
secondary meaning and extensive recognition.

For example: Article 21 of the Constitution of Indian contains only 18 words.

But the Supreme Court gave several guidelines in several cases while applying
them with the context of the whole constitution.

5. While disposing a case, the Allahabad High court observed: "in order to
ascertain the true Intent and purpose of a statutory provision, the Court should
not read the provision completely divorced or detached from the context in
which the provision is set or lose sight of the object or purpose of the enactment
as manifested by the other related provisions appearing on the same statute."

6. It is the duty of the Judge to examine every word of a statute in its widest
sense i.e. other enacting provisions of the same statute, its preamble, the
existing state of the law, other statutes in pari materia, the mischief and other
legitimate means.
7. The principle that the statute must be read as a whole is equally applicable to
different parts of the same section. The section must be construed as a whole
whether or not one of the parts is a saving clause or a proviso, it is not
permissible to omit any part of it, the whole section should be read together.

Case Law
Election Commission of India vs. TRS
This case was related to interpretation of Section 150 of Representation of
People’s Act, 1951.
The main issue was whether section 150 be read under chapter III without
reading any parts of the statute.
The Court held that it can not be read in isolation.
Conclusion:

To conclude, Interpretation is a process to ascertain the correct meaning of the

legislations. In this process, the whole statute, wherever necessary, must be read
and the interpretation must be in such a way to make the statute workable and
effective. The basic and fundamental rule of interpretation is that statute must be
read as a whole, and all parts of an Act should be taken together. The whole and
every part of the act should be considered in the determination of the meaning
of any of its parts.

3. Statute must be read to make it effective and workable.

Ut res magis valeat quam pereat : legal maxim - iPleaders , CW

The whole statute, wherever necessary, must be read and the interpretation must be in such a
way to make the statute workable and effective.
This principle was based on the maxim ‘ut res magis valeat quam pereat’ means that it is
better for a thing to have an effect than for it to become void. While interpreting any
provision, the courts should not lean towards a construction that renders any provision or the
statute void or futile. Hence, whenever the words used in a provision are imprecise, uncertain,
and ambiguous thereby leading to the possibility of alternative constructions, then the courts
should construe the provision in such a manner that none of the provisions of the statute is
turned inoperative.

Avtar Singh v. the State of Punjab (1965) SC

In this case, the question arose regarding the interpretation of Section 39 of the Electricity
Act, 1910. The appellant was convicted for theft of electricity from the Punjab State
Electricity Board under Section 39 of the Electricity Act and the respondent proceeded
against him under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In the appeal filed by the
appellant, he did not challenge the finding that he had committed the theft but only raised a
question of law that his conviction was illegal in view of certain statutory provisions.
Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 provided that, “Whoever dishonestly abstracts,
consumes or uses any energy shall be deemed to have committed theft within the meaning of
the Indian Penal Code”. Hence, as per Section 39, an accused found guilty shall be punished
under Section 379 of the I.P.C.
Section 50 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 provided for the procedure for conviction in the
following terms: No prosecution shall be instituted against any person for any offence
against the Act…. except at the instance of the Government or an Electrical Inspector, or of a
person aggrieved by the same.

The appellant contended that he could not be convicted under Section 39 as the procedure for
conviction as required by Section 50 was not followed. According to the appellant, his
prosecution was bad and incompetent as it was not at the instance of the Government or an
Electrical Inspector or a person aggrieved by the theft.
The Supreme Court held that since the offence is against the Electricity Act and not the I.P.C.,
the procedure provided under Section 50 must have been followed. The conviction of the
appellant was set aside.
Thus, the Court, in this case applied the maxim ut res magis valeat quam pereat and avoided
the construction that would have rendered Section 50 inoperative and futile.

4,5 CW

4. If the meaning is plain the effect must be given to it irrespective of its

concequences.
In construing Statutes, the cardinal rule is to construe its provisions literally and
grammatically giving the words their ordinary and natural meaning. This rule is also known
as the Plain meaning rule. The first and foremost step in the course of interpretation is to
examine the language and the literal meaning of the statute. The words in an enactment have
their own natural effect and the construction of an act depends on its wording. There should
be no additions or substitution of words in the construction of statutes and in its
interpretation. The primary rule is to interpret words as they are. It should be taken into note
that the rule can be applied only when the meanings of the words are clear i.e. words should
be simple so that the language is plain and only one meaning can be derived out of the
statute.

To avoid ambiguity, legislatures often include “definitions” sections within a statute, which
explicitly define the most important terms used in that statute. But some statutes omit a
definitions section entirely, or (more commonly) fail to define a particular term. The plain
meaning rule attempts to guide courts faced with litigation that turns on the meaning of a
term not defined by the statute, or on that of a word found within a definition itself.

Proponents of the plain meaning rule claim that it prevents courts from taking sides in
legislative or political issues. They also point out that ordinary people and lawyers do not
have extensive access to secondary sources.

Example- In probate law the rule is also favoured because the testator is typically not around
to indicate what interpretation of a will is appropriate. Therefore, it is argued, extrinsic
evidence should not be allowed to vary the words used by the testator or their meaning. It can
help to provide for consistency in interpretation.

Facts-

1. The defendant was charged with solicitation and acceptance of bribes. Further the
district court, on petitioner’s pre-trial motion, the court has dismissed the indictment
on the ground that the speech or debate clause of the constitution shielded him ‘from
any prosecution for alleged bribery to perform a legislative act, in the supreme court
of India, in which the petitioner pretends that the supreme court does not have the
jurisdiction to entertain because there was express parliamentary privilege given to
him, and the court has to apply it and interpret the same.

ISSUE

1. Whether by virtue of article 105 of the constitution of India, member of parliament

can claim immunity from prosecution on a charge of bribery in a criminal court?

Judgement

1. The court has taken the judgement into a literal interpretation of the provision 105(1)
and 105(2) increases the scope of immunity under it. According to article 105(2) of
the constitution of India, a member of the parliament is immune from any kind of
proceedings against him in respect of any vote or in respect of the parliament.

5. Language of the statute must be read as it is

The basic principle of interpretation is to attribute to words their exact and original meaning,
as long as the words are clear and reflect the intent of the law. This rule stipulates that terms
must be considered literally and from the point of view of their natural effect. It is also known
as the normal reading rule, which means that the terms must be read as it is, with no
additions or substitutions of words when interpreted. The essence of the rule is that, "The
focus should be on what the law says rather than what the law means." However, even with
such a literal interpretation, the overall goal of the law must be considered. As Viscount
Haldane quoted, "If the language used has a natural meaning, we cannot deviate from it
unless, when reading the whole law, the context compels us to do so."

6. Nature and Kinds of Indian Laws: Statutory, Non-statutory, Codified &

Un-codified, State-made and State - recognised laws.

Indian laws are a complex framework governing various aspects of society,

ranging from civil liberties to economic regulations. These laws are derived
from multiple sources and can be categorized in various ways based on their
origin, nature, and recognition.

1. Statutory Laws: These are laws enacted by the legislature. They are
formally written and codified into statutes or codes. Statutory laws are
created through the legislative process, which involves the proposal,
debate, and voting by the legislative body.

Examples include acts passed by the Parliament of India or state

legislatures, such as the Indian Penal Code or the Companies Act.

2. Non-Statutory Laws: These are laws that are not enacted by the
legislature but are created by other entities such as government agencies,
administrative bodies, or judicial decisions. Non-statutory laws may
include rules, regulations, ordinances, and judicial precedents. They
derive their authority from the powers delegated by the legislature or
from common law principles.
 Examples include rules issued by regulatory bodies like the Reserve Bank
of India or judgments by the Supreme Court of India establishing legal
principles.

3. Codified Laws: Codified laws are systematic collections of legal rules

and principles organized into a comprehensive legal code. These laws are
consolidated and arranged according to specific topics or subjects.
Codified laws provide clarity and accessibility to legal provisions.
Examples include the Indian Penal Code, the Indian Contract Act, and the
Constitution of India.

4. Uncodified Laws: Uncodified laws are legal principles and rules that are
not systematically arranged into a single code but exist in various sources
such as customary law, religious texts, judicial decisions, and
conventions. Uncodified laws may lack uniformity and can be more
complex to navigate compared to codified laws.

Examples include personal laws based on religious customs and

traditions, such as Hindu personal laws or Muslim personal laws.

5. State-made Laws: These are laws enacted by state legislatures

concerning matters within their jurisdiction as provided by the
Constitution of Indi Each state in India has its own legislative assembly
empowered to make laws on subjects enumerated in the State List or
Concurrent List of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. Examples
include state laws on land revenue, local governance, and education.

6. State-Recognized Laws: These are laws that are recognized and

enforced by the state despite not being formally enacted by the
legislature. State-recognized laws may include customary laws, tribal
laws, and other traditional legal systems prevalent in certain regions or
communities. These laws are often acknowledged and enforced by the
 state judiciary alongside statutory laws. Examples include customary
laws of various tribes and communities and religious laws governing
family matters.

Understanding the nature and kinds of Indian laws is essential for

comprehending the legal framework that governs various aspects of life in India
and the interaction between different sources and types of laws.

7. Explain the scope of General Clauses Act during interpretation.

On March 11, 1897, the General Clauses Act of 1897 was enacted to combine
and expand the General Clauses Acts of 1868 and 1887.

The General Clauses Act of 1897, also known as the Interpretation Act, plays
a crucial role in interpreting legislation. Its scope extends across various statutes
and legal instruments, providing general rules and principles for the
interpretation of terms, application of provisions, and resolution of ambiguities
in laws enacted by the Indian legislature. The scope of the General Clauses Act,
1897, and its role in interpretation:

1. Definition and Standardization:

o The General Clauses Act establishes a standard set of legal

terminology, techniques, and expressions. It aims to avoid
repetition and provides a consistent framework for interpreting
laws.

o It defines terms more clearly, ensuring uniformity of speech by

offering commonly used terminology across various statutes.

2. Applicability:

o The Act applies to all fields of law and covers provisions related to
interpretation in Indian legislation.
 o Its definitions come into play when no specific definition exists in
a Central Act or regulation, unless the context demands otherwise.

3. Preventing Redundancy:

o The Act was designed to make legislative language more concise.

It eliminates the need for repeating the same words within the same
piece of law.

o By minimizing ambiguity, it provides clear guidelines for handling

contradictory sections and distinguishes acts based on their
commencement and enforcement dates.

4. Statutory Aid to Interpretation:

o When there’s a disagreement between pre-constitutional and post-

constitutional laws, and no clear definition exists in individual
enactments, the General Clauses Act becomes very valuable.

o It aids in interpreting both statutory and non-statutory provisions.

5. Miscellaneous Provisions: The Act contains miscellaneous provisions

relating to legal proceedings, official notifications, and delegated
legislation, among others. These provisions supplement the general rules
of interpretation and provide additional guidance for the application of
statutory provisions in specific situations.

Overall, the General Clauses Act, 1897, serves as a valuable tool for
courts and legal practitioners in interpreting statutes and resolving
interpretative issues arising from legislative enactments. By providing
general principles and rules of construction, the Act promotes clarity,
consistency, and uniformity in the interpretation and application of laws,
thereby contributing to the stability and predictability of the legal system.
Objectives and importance of the General Clauses Act

The Act consolidates many provisions concerning word interpretation and legal
principles into a single statute that would typically get stated separately in
numerous Acts and legislation.

As a result, whatever the Act specifies about the interpretation of words or legal
principles, it must be read in any act or legislation to which it applies.

The Act has several goals, including:

 To make Central Acts’ language more concise;

 To ensure uniformity of phrasing in Central Acts by providing definitions

for a set of commonly used terms;

 To express some useful rules for the construction and interpretation of the
central acts explicitly.

 To prevent errors and omissions by incorporating some common form

clauses into each act that would otherwise get included in each Central
Act.

The Supreme Court outlined the Act’s objective in the matter of Chief
Inspector of Mines v. Karam Chand Thapar. The court stated that the
General Clauses Act aims to consolidate many provisions about word
interpretation and legal principles that would ordinarily have to be defined
separately in various Acts and legislations into a single statute. Legislation’s
goal is to eliminate superfluous wording from statutes whenever possible.

The Act specifies how general Acts and other legislation with an all-India scope
should get construed. Its significance is clear in light of the many legislations to
which it applies.
However, much more may be said regarding the significance of the Interpretive
Act, termed the “Law of All Laws.”
1. Interpretative Aid: One of the primary objectives of the General Clauses
Act is to serve as an interpretative aid for understanding statutes. It
provides general principles and rules for the interpretation of legal
provisions, definitions, and terms used in statutes. By laying down
uniform guidelines, it helps ensure consistency and clarity in the
interpretation of laws across different statutes.

2. Promotion of Legal Certainty: The Act aims to promote legal certainty

by providing rules for the commencement, continuation, and repeal of
statutes. It establishes mechanisms to address situations where statutes
are repealed and re-enacted, ensuring continuity in legal proceedings and
minimizing ambiguity regarding the applicability of laws.

3. Continuity and Consistency: Another objective is to maintain continuity

and consistency in the application of laws. The Act specifies how
references to officers, authorities, and legal proceedings should be
construed to ensure that legal rights and obligations remain unaffected by
changes in statutes. It helps in seamlessly transitioning from old
enactments to new ones without disrupting ongoing legal processes.

4. Facilitation of Administrative Processes: The Act facilitates

administrative processes by providing clarity on the powers and
authorities conferred by statutes. It ensures that references to officers and
authorities in statutes are construed broadly to include any person
authorized to act on their behalf. This helps in the smooth functioning of
administrative bodies and agencies by enabling them to exercise their
powers effectively.

5. Uniform Application to Central Acts and Regulations: The Act aims to

ensure uniformity in the application of laws by extending its provisions to
central acts and regulations unless a different intention appears in those
 enactments. This promotes consistency in legal interpretation and
administration across different statutes and regulatory frameworks.

6. Adaptability and Flexibility: While providing general principles for

interpretation, the Act also allows for adaptability and flexibility in
certain contexts. It recognizes that different statutes may require different
modes of interpretation based on their nature and purpose. Thus, it allows
for variations in interpretation when the context of a particular statute
warrants it.

In essence, the General Clauses Act serves as a foundational legal instrument

that underpins the interpretation and application of statutes in India. By
fulfilling its objectives, it contributes to the clarity, consistency, and
effectiveness of the legal framework, thereby enhancing legal certainty and
facilitating the administration of justice.

General rules of formation of the General Clauses Act

Coming into operation of enactment (Section 5)/ Commencement of

legislation

If a Central Act does not specify a date for its implementation, it will get
executed when:

 It receives the Governor General’s assent in the case of the Central Act.

 It is enacted before the beginning of the Constitution of India and/or

 It is provided with the President’s approval in the case of a Parliamentary

act.

If a precise implementation date is specified in the Gazette, the Act will take
effect on that date.
Unless the contrary is expressed, a [Central Act] or Regulation shall be
construed as coming into operation immediately on the expiration of the day
preceding its commencement.

Effect of Repeal (Section 6)

Unless some other reason exists, any central legislation or legislation enacted
after the commencing of the General Clauses Act shall not repeal any Act which
is enacted or is yet to be enacted. The repeal shall not:

 Revive something that was not implemented or established during the

period of repeal.

 Impact the prior operation of any repealed enactment or anything done or

experienced under it.

 Affect any right, privilege, duty, or responsibility obtained, accrued, or

incurred due to any repealed legislation.

 Affect any penalty, forfeiture, or punishment imposed in connection with

any crime committed in violation of any repealed legislation

 Affect any investigation, litigation, or remedy relating to such claims,

privilege, debt, or obligation, or any investigation, litigation, or remedy
that may be started, continued, or insisted upon.

Repeal of Act making textual amendment in Act or Regulation (Section 6A)

If any Central Act or legislation enacted after the enactment of the General
Clauses Act attempts to repeal any legislation by which the content of any
Central Act or Legislation was revised by the:

 explicit omission,

 insertion, or
  replacement of any matter,

The repeal shall not prejudice the continuation of any such revision made by the
legislation which is repealed and in effect at the time of such repeal unless a
different purpose appears.

Revival of repealed enactments (Section 7)

To recover, either entirely or partly, any legislation wholly or partially

abolished, it shall be essential to specify that purpose in any Central Act or
legislation adopted after the beginning of the General Clauses Act.

This clause also applies to all Central Acts enacted after January 3, 1868, and to
all regulations enacted on or after January 14, 1887.

Construction of references to repealed enactments. (Section 8)

If any provision of this enactment is repealed or re-enacted with or without any

modification, then the previous provision before re-enactment should be
considered as a reference to the provision re-enacted unless a different intention
appears from the newly enacted provision.

Ex- Constitution of India,1950----------- The Government of India Act, 1935

Computation of Time (Section 10)

If any law or proceeding is instructed or permitted to be completed or taken in

any court or office on a specific day or within a period prescribed by any
legislation or legislation, and the Court or office is shut on that day or on the last
day of the period prescribed, the act or proceeding shall be regarded as complete
or taken in due period if it is done or taken the next day the Court or office is
open.

Distance measurement
Unless a contrary intention shows, any distance calculated for the objectives of
any Central Act or Legislation issued after the commencing of this Act shall be
calculated in a horizontal line in a flat direction.

Conclusion

One of the legislative aids to interpretation is the General Clauses Act. This Act
specifies the meaning of a term in general, rather than a strict or exhaustive,
sense. Its purpose is to make the statutory language more concise.

The General Clauses Act of 1897 intends to create general definitions that apply
to all the Central Statutes and legislations that lack a definition. Every Law has
a preamble that defines the Act’s scope, intent, and purpose, and it is the
primary source for determining the legislative intent underlying the Act.

It provides that where legislation does not expressly provide a specific date of
effect, it will take effect on the day it obtains the President’s assent. When an act
is revoked, it must be treated as if it never existed in the first place.

RULES OF INTERPRETAION

1.Literal or Grammatical Rule

It is the first rule of interpretation. According to this rule, the words used in this
text are to be given or interpreted in their natural or ordinary meaning. After the
interpretation, if the meaning is completely clear and unambiguous then the
effect shall be given to a provision of a statute regardless of what may be the
consequences.
The basic rule is that whatever the intention legislature had while making any
provision it has been expressed through words and thus, are to be interpreted
according to the rules of grammar. It is the safest rule of interpretation of
statutes because the intention of the legislature is deduced from the words and
the language used.

According to this rule, the only duty of the court is to give effect if the language
of the statute is plain and has no business to look into the consequences which
might arise. The only obligation of the court is to expound the law as it is and if
any harsh consequences arise then the remedy for it shall be sought and looked
out by the legislature.

Case Laws

Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay, In this case, the appellant, a citizen of

India after arriving at the airport did not declare that he was carrying gold with
him. During his search was carried on, gold was found in his possession as it
was against the notification of the government and was confiscated
under section 167(8) of Sea Customs Act.

Later on, he was also charged under section 8 of the Foreign Exchange
Regulations Act, 1947. The appellant challenged this trial to be violative
under Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution. According to this article, no
person shall be punished or prosecuted more than once for the same offence.
This is considered as double jeopardy.

It was held by the court that the Seas Act neither a court nor any judicial
tribunal. Thus, accordingly, he was not prosecuted earlier. Hence, his trial was
held to be valid.

State of Kerala v. Mathai Verghese and others, 1987 AIR 33 SCR(1)

317, in this case a person was caught along with the counterfeit currency
“dollars” and he was charged under section 120B, 498A, 498C and 420 read
with section 511 and 34 of Indian Penal Code for possessing counterfeit
currency. The accused contended before the court that a charge under
section 498A and 498B of Indian Penal Code can only be levied in the case of
counterfeiting of Indian currency notes and not in the case of counterfeiting
of foreign currency notes. The court held that the word currency notes or
bank note cannot be prefixed. The person was held liable to be charge-
sheeted.

2.The Mischief Rule

Mischief Rule was originated in Heydon’s case in 1584. It is the rule of

purposive construction because the purpose of the statute is most important
while applying this rule. It is known as Heydon’s rule because it was given by
Lord Poke in Heydon’s case in 1584. It is called as mischief rule because the
focus is on curing the mischief.

In the Heydon’s case, it was held that there are four things which have to be
followed for true and sure interpretation of all the statutes in general, which are
as follows-

1. What was the common law before the making of an act.

2. What was the mischief for which the present statute was enacted.

3. What remedy did the Parliament sought or had resolved and appointed to
cure the disease of the commonwealth.

4. The true reason of the remedy.

The purpose of this rule is to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.

Case laws
Smith v. Huges, 1960 WLR 830, in this case around the 1960s, the prostitutes
were soliciting in the streets of London and it was creating a huge problem in
London. This was causing a great problem in maintaining law and order. To
prevent this problem, Street Offences Act, 1959 was enacted. After the
enactment of this act, the prostitutes started soliciting from windows and
balconies.

Further, the prostitutes who were carrying on to solicit from the streets and
balconies were charged under section 1(1) of the said Act. But the prostitutes
pleaded that they were not solicited from the streets.

The court held that although they were not soliciting from the streets yet
the mischief rule must be applied to prevent the soliciting by prostitutes and
shall look into this issue. Thus, by applying this rule, the court held that the
windows and balconies were taken to be an extension of the word street and
charge sheet was held to be correct.

Pyare Lal v. Ram Chandra, the accused in this case, was prosecuted for selling
the sweeten supari which was sweetened with the help of an artificial sweetener.
He was prosecuted under the Food Adulteration Act. It was contended by Pyare
Lal that supari is not a food item. The court held that the dictionary meaning is
not always the correct meaning, thereby, the mischief rule must be applicable,
and the interpretation which advances the remedy shall be taken into
consideration. Therefore, the court held that the word ‘food’ is consumable by
mouth and orally. Thus, his prosecution was held to be valid.

3.Golden Rule—Notes

4. Rule of Harmonious Construction

Harmonious Construction
According to this rule of interpretation, when two or more provisions of the
same statute are repugnant to each other, then in such a situation the court, if
possible, will try to construe the provisions in such a manner as to give effect to
both the provisions by maintaining harmony between the two. The question that
the two provisions of the same statute are overlapping or mutually exclusive
may be difficult to determine.

The legislature clarifies its intention through the words used in the provision of
the statute. So, here the basic principle of harmonious construction is that the
legislature could not have tried to contradict itself. In the cases of interpretation
of the Constitution, the rule of harmonious construction is applied many times.

It can be assumed that if the legislature has intended to give something by one,
it would not intend to take it away with the other hand as both the provisions
have been framed by the legislature and absorbed the equal force of law. One
provision of the same act cannot make the other provision useless. Thus, in no
circumstances, the legislature can be expected to contradict itself.

Hanif Quereshi vs State of Bihar

M.S.M Sharma v. Krishna Sinha, AIR 1959 SC 395.

Facts of the case are as follows- Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution provides
for freedom of speech and expression. Article 194(3) provides to the Parliament
for punishing for its contempt and it is known as the Parliamentary Privilege. In
this case, an editor of a newspaper published the word -for- word record of the
proceedings of the Parliament including those portions which were expunged
from the record. He was called for the breach of parliamentary privilege.

He contended that he had a fundamental right to speech and expression. It was

held by the court that article 19(1)(a) itself talks about reasonable freedom and
therefore freedom of speech and expression shall pertain only to those portions
which have not been expunged on the record but not beyond that.
What are Statutes?

The term “Statutes” has a specific legal meaning. As per Black’s Law
Dictionary, a “Statute” refers to a formal written rule created by a legislative
authority, such as a country, state, city or county. Statutes often dictate what is
allowed or not allowed or they lay out official policies. This term is typically
used to distinguish laws created by legislative bodies from the judgments made
by common law courts and the rules established by government agencies.

What is the Classification of Statutes?

Classification of Statutes can be done based on their duration, nature of

operation, purpose and scope.

Classification of Statutes by Duration

Temporary Statute: A temporary statute is one that specifies a fixed period of

operation and validity within the statute itself. It remains in effect until the
specified time elapses unless repealed earlier. If the legislature wishes to extend
its effect, a new enactment is required. For example, the Finance Act is a
temporary statute, requiring annual reauthorisation.

Permanent Statute: A permanent statute doesn’t have a predefined expiration

date. However, this doesn’t make the statute unchangeable. It can be amended
or repealed by another act.

Classification of Statutes by Method

Mandatory, Imperative or Obligatory Statute: A mandatory statute compels

the performance of certain actions or dictates that specific things must be
carried out in a particular manner or form. Non-compliance typically leads to
legal consequences.

Directory or Permissive Statute: A directory statute merely provides guidance

or permission for actions without compelling their performance. In some cases,
statutes prescribe conditions or forms that are considered essential for the
regulated action and their omission can render the action invalid. In other cases,
these prescriptions are seen as non-binding and failure to follow them might
result in penalties if any are stipulated by the statute.

In the case of H.V. Kamath v. Ahmad Ishaque, it was determined that

mandatory provisions must be strictly adhered to, while substantial compliance
with directory provisions is generally sufficient to meet legal requirements.

Classification of Statues with Reference to Object

Codifying Statute

A codifying statute is one that aims to comprehensively outline the entire body
of law on a specific subject. It seeks to provide a thorough and authoritative
statement of the key legal rules pertaining to that subject. This includes existing
provisions from various statutes on the subject and may also incorporate
common law principles.

An example is the Bill of Exchange Act of 1882 in England, which codified

laws regarding bills of exchange, cheques and promissory notes. Similarly, the
Hindu Succession Act of 1956 in India is a codifying statute that addresses
intestate succession among Hindus.

Consolidating Statute

A consolidating statute consolidates all statutory enactments related to a

particular subject into a single law, making it easier to access and understand. It
brings together existing statutory provisions on the subject, often with minor
modifications.

For example, in England, the Law of Property Act of 1925 consolidated the acts
of 1922 and 1924. In India, the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 is a
consolidating statute concerning criminal procedures. Such statutes not only
compile earlier laws but also repeal the earlier acts for the sake of clarity.

Declaratory Statute

A declaratory statute is one that clarifies and removes doubts or

misunderstandings about the meaning of terms or expressions within the
common law or statutory law. When courts have interpreted an expression
differently from what the legislature intended, a declaratory statute is passed to
set the correct meaning of that expression. In India, the Income Tax
(Amendment) Act of 1985, which added explanation 2 to section 40 of the
Income Tax Act of 1961 and the Finance Act of 1987, which amended the
definition of “Owner of house property” in section 27, are examples of
declaratory acts.

It’s important to note that the mere use of the phrase “it is hereby declared” does
not automatically make a statute a declaratory statute. A declaratory statute
typically contains a preamble and uses terms like “declared” and “enacted” to
signal its intent.

Remedial Statute

A remedial statute is a kind of law that offers new help or a new solution. Its
main purpose is to improve how rights are protected and address problems or
errors in the old law. Examples of remedial statutes include the Maternity
Benefits Act of 1961 and the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1923. In these
laws, you’ll often find the phrase “for remedy whereof” right before the actual
law.
Blackstone, a legal scholar, thought that remedial statutes could either expand or
limit rights. They could expand rights when they made the law more generous
or they could limit rights when they restricted existing legal rights. In a case
called Central Railway Workshop, Jhansi v. Vishwanath, the court decided
that all laws in a welfare state aim to promote general well-being. Some laws
are more responsive to urgent social needs and have a more direct and
noticeable impact on fixing social problems.

Enabling Statute

An enabling statute is a law that allows something that was previously

forbidden, with or without specific rules on how to do it. It widens the scope of
what’s allowed under common law. An enabling statute makes an action lawful,
even if it wouldn’t be otherwise.

In a case called Bidi, Bidi Leaves and Tobacco Merchants Association v.

State of Bombay, the court explained that an enabling act not only permits
something to happen but also gives the necessary authority to do what’s needed
to achieve the law’s goal. Any conditions set by an enabling statute for the
public good must be followed because they are essential. An example is Section
49-A(1) and 49-A(2) of the Advocates Act of 1961, as amended by Act 21 of
1964.

Disabling Statute

A disabling statute is one that limits or reduces a right granted by common law.
It’s a law that restricts a common law right.

Penal Statute

A penal statute is a law that punishes certain actions or wrongdoings. This type
of law can be in the form of a detailed criminal code with many sections that
define punishments for different wrongs. For example, the Criminal Procedure
Code, the Indian Penal Code, the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954
and the Arms Act of 1959 are all examples of penal statutes.

Penalties for breaking these laws can include fines, the loss of property,
imprisonment or even the death penalty. When the law enforces obedience not
through individual lawsuits but by imposing punishments as commanded by the
law, it’s considered a penal statute. Penalties can only be imposed when the law
explicitly states so and any doubts should benefit the accused.

Taxing Statute

A taxing statute is a law that imposes taxes on income or certain types of

transactions. Examples include income tax, wealth tax, sales tax and gift tax.
These taxes help the government collect money to support public welfare.
However, it’s essential that a statute clearly states that taxes must be paid and
any doubts about this should benefit the person being taxed.

Explanatory Statute.
An explanatory statute is one which explains a law. In Keshavlal v. Mohanlal,
it was held that an explanatory statute is enacted with the view to supply an
apparent omission or to clarify ambiguity as to the meaning of an expression
used in the previous statute. An act enacted for the express purpose of
explaining or clearing the doubts as to the meaning of a previous Act is an act of
explanation or an explanatory statute. For instance the Royal Mines Act, 1688 in
Britain was passed to encourage mining certain base metals with Royal Mines
act 1963 was enacted for better explanation of the earlier act. The latter is an
example of explanatory statute.

Amending Statute

An amending statute is a law that adds to or changes the original law to improve
it or better achieve its original purpose. It doesn’t cancel out the old law; it
becomes part of it. Examples include the Direct Taxes Amendments Act of 1974
and the Land Acquisition (Amendments) Act of 1984.

Repealing Statute

A repealing statute is a law that cancels out an earlier law. It can do this
explicitly by saying so in the statute or implicitly through its language. For
example, the Hyderabad District Municipalities Act of 1956 repealed the
Hyderabad Municipal and Town Committees Act of 1951.

Curative or Validating Statute

A curative or validating statute is one passed to fix problems in a previous law

or to make legal proceedings, documents or actions valid, even if they didn’t
meet the legal requirements. These statutes often include phrases like
“notwithstanding any judgment, decree or court order.” They’re meant to make
previously unlawful actions legal or to overturn court decisions.

In a case involving Amarendra Kumar Mohapatra and others v. State of

Orissa and others, the Supreme Court of India explained that while deciding
legal rights is a job for the courts, only the legislature can pass laws to validate
illegal actions or laws. However, when the validity of a validating law is in
question, the court must consider three things:

 Whether the law fixes the problems that made the action or law invalid.

 Whether the legislature had the authority to validate what was declared
invalid before.

 Whether the validation respects the rights guaranteed by the constitution.

A validating law is effective only if the answers to these three questions
are “yes.”

Conclusion
The classification of statutes refers to the categorisation of laws based on their
distinctive characteristics or purposes. Statutes can be grouped into various
categories depending on their intent, effect or content. Common classifications
include remedial statutes, which aim to correct legal flaws and penal statutes,
which outline punishments for specific actions.