Literal Rule of Interpretation:

Concept, Nature and Scope

Prof. S. P. Srivastava
Department of Law and Governance
Central University of South Bihar
 literal interpretation has been accepted as the
Primary rule.
Under this rule the judge considers what the statute
actually says.
Principle of separation powers mandates the
executive must act and the judiciary in the course of
administration must apply the law aslaid down by
the said legislative will.

Basic Premises
the judge shall read the words in the statute as it is,
i.e. their plain, natural, ordinary and everyday
meaning shall be read in reference to any of the
enactment whose provisions are in dispute or whose
scope has been contested thereto, even if the effect
of this is to produce what might be considered as an
otherwise unjust or undesirable outcome.

Meaning of Literal Rule

The literal rule says that the intention of Parliament
is best found in the ordinary and natural meaning of
the words used.
According to this rule if the language of the statute
is expressly clear, it shuts the possibility of further
speculation.
 Where the language of an Act is clear and explicit,
the Court must give effect to it, whatever may be
the consequences, for in that case the words of the
statute speak of the intention of the Legislature.

Continued:
Lord Diplock observed, ““Where the meaning of the
statutory words is plain and unambiguous it is not
then for the judges to invent fancied ambiguities as
an excuse for failing to give effect to its plain
meaning because they consider the consequences for
doing so would be In expedient, or even unjust or
immoral.
Expresio Unius Est excusio alterius- the express
mention of one thing is the exclusion of another.

Jurisprudential Basis
Absoluta sententia expositure non indigent- plain
words need no exposition.
Verbis legis non est reclendum- which means from
the word of law there should be no departure.

Continued:
According to this rule if the language of the statute is
expressly clear, it shuts the possibility of further
speculation. If the word has a single clear meaning and it
is precisely in consistency with the aim that it leaves no
room for doubt and no loopholes; it is coextensive with
its aim; it is ready to accomplish its purpose without
marring context and object, it is a perfect drafting and it
should be interpreted in line with the plain Meaning.
The judges must interpret the provisions, considering
only the plain grammatical meaning of the words
regardless whether the conclusion is sensible or
senseless even unfair

Scope of Literal Rule

The court has nothing to do with the question
whether the legislature has committed an absurdity.
The judge should pay attention to ‘what the statute
actually says rather than considering what it might
mean’. Even in hard cases.
The court is not authorized to re-legislate even if
they consider it is omission on the parliament.
There is no occasion for resorting to the rules of
statutory construction. If a statute speaks for itself
clearly

Continued:
Constitutionally it respects parliamentary supremacy
and the right of Parliament to make any laws .
It also encourages precision in drafting and ensures
that anyone who can read English can determine the
law, which promotes certainty and reduces litigation.
A statute must be presumed to have been used in
their natural sense.
Statutes are embodiments of authoritative formulae
and the very words which are used to constitute part
of law.

Rationality and Reasons

Nelson Motis v. UOI, AIR 1992 SC 1981, when the words
of a statute are plain ,clear and unambiguous i.e; they
are reasonably susceptible to only one meaning, the
courts are bound to give effect to that meaning
irrespective of consequences.
Rohitash Kumar v. Om Prakash Sharma, AIR 2013 SC 30,
the hon’ble Supreme Court court laid down that there
may be a statute which causes great hardships or
inconvenience, the court has no choice but to enforce it
in full rigour. Hardships can’t be used as a basis to alter
the meaning of the language, if such meaning is clear.

Leading Indian Cases

Lalita Kumari v. Government of Uttar Pradesh, the main
question was the interpretation of Section 154 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure. The court held that use of
word “shall” leaves no discretion to police officer to hold
preliminary enquiry before recording an FIR. Use of the
expression “information” without any qualification also
denotes that police has to record information despite he
being unsatisfied by its reasonableness. So here, the
court interpreted the literal meaning of the words used.

Continued:
In the case of Union of India v. Sankarchand
Himatlal Sheth & another, it is held by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court that: “Where the statute’s meaning
is clear and explicit, words cannot be interpolated.

Continued:
Abley v. Dale (1851)11 CB 378,it was laid down: If the
precise words are plain and unambiguous, in our
judgement, we are bound to construe them in their
ordinary sense, even though it do lead, in our view of
the case, to an absurdity or manifest injustice.
The Fisher v Bell case is one of the significant examples
of the literal interpretation. the Court of Appeal held
that the conviction should be set aside for the reason
that the technical meaning in contract law of ‘offer’ was
not equal to the display of an item in a shop window.
This was not an offer; it was only an invitation to treat.
Under the literal legal meaning of ‘offer’, the shop-
keeper had not made an offer to sell.

U.K Cases
It creates a zone of certainty.
It tells the public that if the text is plain, it means
what it says and it is safe to rely on it.
it supports formal equality.
It can be used as an apparently neutral proxy for
strict construction.
Our relative ignorance of fact.
Relative indeterminacy of aim.
. It is not always easy to say whether a word is plain
or not?
 It is ill suited to modern social legislations.
It can’t be applied to the changing needs of a
developing society.

Limitations
Logical Defect- ambiguity, inconsistency and
incompleteness.
Absurdity or irrationality

Defects of Literal Rule

Artful Text Selection-identify the text-to-be-
interpreted.
Elastic Co-Text-refers to the text immediately
surrounding the text-to-be interpreted.
The Shifting Meaning Game-plain meaning might be
any of the following:"dictionary" ,facial meaning or
intended meaning, audience based meaning or
applied meaning.
It Must Be Plain To You If It's Plain To Me.

PMR Tricks
The Inherent Meaning Illusion-once a text is written,
it "contains" a meaning that does not change, but
remains stable regardless of the context in which the
text is read and regardless of the different
knowledge and expectations readers bring to the
text.
Abandoning Ship-