External Aids to

Interpretation
Dr. Ananya Bibave
  Parliamentary History
 Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances
 Subsequent Social, Political and Economic Developments and
List of External Scientific Inventions
 Reference to other Statutes
Aids  Codifying and Consolidating Statutes
 Contemporanea Expositio est fortissima in lege
 Dictionaries
 Foreign Decisions
 Reference Books
  Bill:
 As the speeches made by the member of the constituent assembly
in the course of debates on the constitution cannot be admitted as
Parliamentary an external aid to the construction of the constitution. in the same
way, the debates on a bill in parliament are not admissible for
History construction of the Act which is ultimately enacted.
 In Chiranjit lal Choudhry v. Union of India FAZAL ALI J. admitted
parliamenatary history including the speech of minister introducing
the Bill as evidence of the circumstances which necessitated the
passing of the act, acourse apparently approved in later decisions.
  In Indra Sawhany v. Union of India, the supreme court referred to
Dr. Ambedkar ‘s speech in the constituent assembly and observe
in interpreting Art 16(4) that the debates in the constituent
assembly could be relied upon as an aid to interpretation of the
Parliamentary constitutional provision is borne out by a series of decision of the
History court. Since the expression backward classes of the citizens is not
defined in constitution, reference to such debates is permissible to
ascertain at any rate the context, background and the object
behind them. Particularly where the court wants to ascertain the
original intent such reference may be unavoidable.
  Statement of objects and reasons
 The statement of objects and reasons accompanying a legislative bill
cannot be used to ascertain the true meaning and effect of the
substantive provisions of the legislation, but it can certainly be
pressed into service for the limited purpose of understanding the
Parliamentary background, the antecedent state of affairs and the object that the
legislation sought to achieve.
History  The statement of object and reasons is undoubtedly an aid to
construction but that by itself cannot be termed to be and by itself
cannot be interpreted. It is a useful guide but the interpretation and
the intent shall have to be gathered from the entirety of the statute
and when the language of the sections providing an appeal to a
forum is clear and categorical no external aid is permissible in
interpretation of the same.
  Commissions/Inquiry committees:
 Report of commissions and enquiry committees preceding of
introduction of a Bill have also been referred to as evidence of
Parliamentary historical facts or of surrounding circumstances or of mischief or evil
intended to be remedied and at times for interpreting the Act.
History Example can be taken of SODRA DEVI’s case in which Income Tax
Enquiry report was referred; in Express newspaper case the press
commission’s case was referred.
  Lord Atkinson said “in the construction of statutes, it is, of course
at all times and under all circumstances permissible to have regard
Historical to the state of things existing at the time of the statutes was
passed and evils, which, as appears from the provisions, it was
facts and designed to remedy.”

surrounding  In the words of Lord Halsbury: “The subject-matter with which the
legislature was dealing, and the facts existing at the time with

circumstanc respect to which the legislature was legislating are legitimate

topics to consider in ascertaining what was the object and purpose
of the legislation in passing the Act. (Herron v. Rathmines and
es Rathgare Commissioners, (1892)
  Generally, statutes are of “always speaking variety” and the court
Subsequent is free to apply the current meaning of the statute to present day
conditions. Therefore, the reference to circumstances existing at
Social, Political the time of the passing of the statute does not mean that the
and Economic language used, at any rate, in a modern statute should be held to
be inapplicable to social, political and economic developments or
Advancements to scientific inventions not known at the time of passing of the
statute.
  A statute may be interpreted to include circumstances or
situations which were unknown or did not exist at the time of the
Subsequent enactment of the statute. (Sr. Electric Inspector v. Laxminarayan
Chopra, AIR 1962 SC 159, p. 557 (HL)). Lord Bridge observed:
Social, Political “When a change in social conditions produces a novel situation,
which was not in contemplation at the time when a statute is first
and Economic enacted, there can be no a priori assumption that the enactment
does not apply to the new circumstances. If the language of the
Advancements enactment is wide enough to extend to those circumstances,
there is no reason why it should not apply.” (Comdel Commodities
Ltd. V. Siporex Trade, SA, (1990)
Subsequent  In a case before it, the Supreme Court emphasized that the Indian
Social, Political Penal Code should be construed, as far as its language permits,
with reference to modern needs and not with reference to notions
and Economic of crimainal jurisdiction prevailing at the time when the Code was
enacted. (Mobarik Ali Ahmad v. State of Bombay, AIR 1957
Advancements
  “ It is perhaps difficult to attribute to legislative body functioning
in a static society that its intention was couched in terms of
considerable breadth so as to take within its sweep the future
developments comprehended by the phraseology used. It is more
reasonable to confine its intention only to the circumstances
Senior Electric obtaining at the time the law was made. But in modern
progressive society it would be unreasonable to confine the
Inspector v. intention of the legislature to the meaning attributable to the
word used at the time the law was made, for a modern legislature
Laxminarayan making laws to govern society which is first moving must
presumed to be aware of an enlarged meaning the same concept
Chopra might attract with the march of time and with the modern
revolutionary changes brought about in social, economic, political,
and scientific and other fields of human activity. Indeed, unless a
contrary intention appears, an interpretation should be given to
the words used to take in new facts and situation, if the words are
capable of comprehending them.”
  Legislations which are the outcome of the scientific
advancements have to be interpreted in the light of those
Scientific scientific advancements. And if any further changes cake place in
Inventions the scientific developments, then the interpretation shall be
needed to be made taking into consideration those subsequent
changes in the technology.
  The other statutes are only an external aid to the interpretation.
Reference to Another statute can be used in interpreting the statute under
other statutes consideration only when it is shown that the two statues are
similar. (Harshad Mehta v. State of Maharashtra, 2001)
  Statues in pari materia means statues dealing the same subject-
matter or forming part of the same system. The rule of context
which says that the statute must be read as a whole as words are
to be understood in their context, permits reference to other
statutes in pari materia.
Statutes in pari  Craies: In an American case, pari materia was explained as
materia “statutes are in pari materia which relate to the same person or
thing, or to the same class of persons or things. The word pari
must not be confounded with the similes. It is used in opposition
to it intimating not likeness merely but identity. It is phase
applicable to public statutes or general laws made at different
times and in reference to the same subject.”
  Lord Mansfield emphasized that “where there are different
statutes in pari materia though made at different times, or even
expired, and not referring to each other, they shall be taken and
construed together, as one system and as explanatory of each
other.” R. v. Loxdale
Statutes in pari  The sense in which a term has been understood in several statutes
does not necessarily through any light on the manner in which
materia term should be understood generally, especially when the statutes
in question are not in pari material and are not dealing with any
cognate subject and definition coined by legislature is an extended
or artificial meaning so assigned to fulfil object of that particular
enactment. (Maheswari Fish Seed Farm v. T.N. Electricity Board,
(2004)
  The copyright Act, 1957 and the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957,
Statutes in pari are not statutes in pari materia and therefore, it has been held
materia that the definition contained in the former should not applied in
latter.( Tata Consultancy Services v. State of A.P.,(2005)
  According to Lord MacMillan,”if an Act of Parliament uses the
same language which was used in a former Act of Parliament
referring to the same subject, and passed with the same purpose,
Help from and for the same object, the safe and well-known rule of
construction is to assume that the legislature when using well-
earlier statutes known words upon which there have been well-known decisions
uses those words in the sense which the decisions have attached
to them.
  The purpose of a codifying statute is to present an orderly and
authoritative statement of the leading rules of law on a given
subject, whether those rules are to be found in statues or common
Codifying law.

Statutes  The essence of a codifying statute “is to be exhaustive on the

matter in respect of which it declares the law and it is not the
province of a judge to disregard or go outside the letter of
enactment according to its true construction”.
  The purpose of a consolidating statute is to present whole body of
statutory law on a subject in complete form, repeating the former
statutes.
 A consolidating statutes is not a mere compilation of earlier
Consolidating enactments. The object of the consolidation is to make a useful
Statutes code which should be applicable to the circumstances existing at
the time when the consolidating Act was passed. For this object,
all the statutory law bearing upon a particular subject is collected
and is transformed into a useful code.
  Contemporanea Expositio est fortissima in lege, i.e. the effect of
usage and the practice means that word of a statutes will
generally be understood in the sense which they bore when it was
Contemporane passed. Maxwell has said:” it is said the best exposition of a
statute or any other document is that which it has received from
a Expositio est contemporary authority….. where this has been given by
enactment of judicial decision it is of course to be accepted as
fortissima in conclusive,”
lege  The principle of contemporanea expositio is not applicable to
modern statutes. The doctrine is confined to the construction of
ambiguous language used in very old statutes where indeed the
language itself have a rather different meaning of these days.
  Earlier the supreme court refused to apply the principle of
Contemporane contemporanea expositio to the telegraph act, 1885, and the
a Expositio est evidence act, 1872, but it was referred to in the case of R.S.Nayak
v. A.R.Antuley in construing section 21 of Indian Penal Code ,1860
fortissima in and it was held that an M.L.A. is not a public servant, as this
expression is defined therein.
lege
  When a word is not defined in the Act itself, it is permissible to
refer to dictionaries to find out the general sense in which that
word is understood in common parlance or,in other words,
dictionary meaning or common parlance meaning has to be
resorted to. (Municipal Board, Saharanpur v. Imperial Tobacco of
Dictionaries India Ltd., (1999) 1 SCC 566; AIR 1999 SC 264; 1999 ll LJ 202.) But
in selecting one out of the various meanings of a word, regard
must always be had to the context as it is a they fundamental rule
that “the meanings of words and expressions used in an Act must
take their colour from the context in which they appear”(Ram
Narian v. State of U.P., AIR 1957
  Dictionary meaning of a word is not considered when a plain
reading of the provision brings out what was intended State of
Maharastra v. Praful B Desai, (2003)
 The view of KRISHNA AIYAR, J. is pertinent here. He said:
Dictionaries “Dictionaries are not dictators of statutory construction where the
benignant mood of a law, more emphatically, the definition clause
furnishes a different denotation.” SBI v. N. Sundara Money, AIR
1976
  Where an expression in any act has been defined, the said
expression will have the same meaning and it is not necessary to find
out what is the general meaning of the expression. (United Bank of
India v. Debts Recovery Tribunal,(1999) The definition given in the
Dictionaries statue is the determinative factor. (S. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P.,
(1996) Too much reliance on the dictionary meaning with regard to
the context is not proper. (2002) 3 SCC 118.).
 Dictionary meaning cannot be relied upon when there is a express
statutory provision in regard to that matter (Nagulapati
Lakshmamma v. Mupparaju Subbaiah, 1998). But sometimes when
the word is not defined in the Act, dictionaries may be helpful, for
e.g. to determine the meaning of ‘furniture’ dictionary meaning was
relied on. (New Chelur manufacturers (P.) Ltd.. v. CCE, (1997)
  Indian Courts have permitted in the interpretations of Indian
statutes sobered use of those foreign decisions of the countries
Foreign which follow the same system of jurisprudence as the Indian
jurisprudence and which are rendered on statutes in pari materia.
Decisions  Statutory construction must be home-spun even if hospitable to
alien thinking.( Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A.
Rajappa, AIR 1978.
  There is one qualification attached to the, assistance of foreign
decisions that prime importance is always to be given to the
language of the relevant Indian Statute, the circumstances and
Foreign the settings in which it is enacted in the conditions where it is to
Decisions be applied and that it is not to be forgotten that there is always an
element of risk in taking ready and hasty assistance from foreign
decisions (Sales Tax Officer, Banaras v. Kanhaiya lal Mukund Lal
Saraf, Air 1959.
  The Supreme Court is not bound by foreign (American) court
decisions; they have only a persuasive value. But if they are in
consonance with Indian Law the courts can borrow the principles
laid down in foreign decisions keeping in view the changing global
scenario.(Liverpool & London S.P.& I. (2004))
Foreign  Following are the factors which oblige the Indian Courts in taking
Decisions recourse to foreign precedents of English speaking countries:
 Link of the English Common Law and Jurisprudence;
 Similarity of political thought; and
 The use of English language as authoritative text of Indian Statutes.
  In arriving at the true meaning of an enactment of the courts may
refer to the text books also. But it is not necessary that the
Reference meaning given in the text books should correspond to the view of
the court. It is in the discretion of the court to accept or reject the
Books views given in the text book which was referred to by the court.
There are many instances of both rejection and acceptance of the
views expressed in text books.
Questions