Interpretation of

law/statute.
 introduction
 Interpretation- primary function of courts
 Is the process employed by courts to find out
the real intention of the legislature in the
provisions in the statute
 Since the will of the legislature is expressed in
the form of statute, the court is to find out the
intention of the legislature from the language
used by it in the statute.
 Summing up it is the process of unfolding or
unraveling the meaning of the statute.
 Meaning &Definitions
 Webster’s New World dictionary-
 Interpretation
is explanation, translation
exposition, meaning.
 Salmond
 Interpretation or construction is meant the process
by which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning
of the legislature through the medium of the
authoritative forms in which it is expressed.
 Maxwell
 The object of all interpretation is to determine
what intention is conveyed, either expressly or
impliedly by the language used in the statute
 Language is not a precise tool…….

 Words often take their meaning from

context
 Shades of meaning ( eg:-park)
 Words can change over time (grievous)
 Statute can be hurried and not thought
out precisely
 Language differences
 Draftsmen cannot foresee everything
 Judge starts with a presumption
 that the law has not been changed unless
the Act shows a clear intention to do so
 Mens rea is required in criminal cases
 That Parliament has not retrospectively
changed the law
 Courts have applied different norms
while interpreting various enactments.
Through these various norms it has
evolved several principles to achieve
social, economic and political justice
according to the Directive principles
contained in the Constitution of India.
s
 Main rules of interpretation
 Fundamentally of 3 types
1. Literal or grammatical rule
2. Logical or golden rule
3. Mischief rule
 Literal/ grammatical rule
 The cardinal rule is to construe provisions
literally and grammatically giving the words their
ordinary and natural meaning
 the words expressed in the provision are known
as Litera Legis
 Meaning-wording of provision
 The rule confines attention to the verbal
expression of the statute
 Rule is legislature must be deemed to have
meant what it said, and said what it meant
 Normal rule of interpretation
 Motipur Zamindari Co. Pvt Ltd v. State of
Bihar AIR 1962 SC 660-
 Delhi cloth and general mills Co. Ltd v.
State of Rajasthan Air 1980SC 1522
 Golden /Logical rule of
Interpretation
 In construing statutes and all written
instruments, the grammatical and ordinary
sense of words is to be adhered to, unless
that would lead to some absurdity or
some repugnance or inconsistency
with the rest of the instrument, in which
case the grammatical and ordinary sense
of the words may be modified so as to
avoid that repugnancy and no further.
 Meaning- ascertaining the intention of the
legislature and the spirit of the statute
 Resorted to cases of certain defects in the statute
 Ambiguity
 Real or correct content is obscured or burdened by double
meaning or over shadowed by excessiveness or fiction or
fallacy,
 inconsistency &
 Self contradiction or self destruction
 omission.
 Evidence of inactivity or over activity or ignorance or
carelessness. There may not be any ambiguity or
inconsistency, but some lacunae which block the expression
of a complete idea or intention.
 R v. Allen(1872)
 S.57 of the offences against person Act 1861
made it an offence to ‘marry’ whilst the original
spouse was still alive (i.e., without no divorce)
 D claimed that he could not ‘legally marry’
because he was not divorced. The court decided
that in the Act word ‘marry’ means ‘to go
through a ceremony of marriage’. To accept
otherwise would produce an absurd result
 R v. Sigsworth (1935)
 A son had murdered his mother
 Mother had not made a will but, as per
rules the next of her kin (son) would
inherit. No ambiguity in the wording of the
Act, but the court refused to let a
murderer benefit from his crime. Held that
the literal rule should not apply and the
golden rule was used to prevent a
repugnant situation.
 GOLDEN RULE OR PURPOSIVE
CONSTRUCTION
 It is reason which dictates mankind as
well as law, so also in the passing of every
Act.
 The reason for passing an Act may be
some defect in the existing law
 That defect is the mischief of which the
Act is directed, which may be social or
legal
 the rule enables all judges to make
construction as shall-
 Suppress the mischief and advance the remedy
 Suppress subtle inventions and evasions for the
continuance of the mischief for the private benefit
 Add force and life to the cure and remedy
according to the true intent of the makers of the
Act for public good.
 The Mischief rule
 For true interpretation following matters
are to be considered
1. What was the prior law?
2. What were its defects?
3. What are the remedies?
4. What are the reasons for the remedies?
 Always to make such construction as
shall suppress the mischief and advance
the remedy
 It is the progressive interpretation
Smith v. Hughes 1960(1)WLR 830- S.1 of
Street Offences Act,1959 prohibited
prostitutes from soliciting in streets.
 Kelappan v. State of kerala 1989(2) KLT
651
 Purposive approach
 Looks at the purpose behind the
legislation so as to give effect to that
purpose.
 The literal and golden rule determine what
Parliament said. The Mischief rule is
applied to what parliament meant
 General rules of interpretation
 The rules of language are
 Harmonious construction
 The statute must be read as a whole
 Noscitur a sociis
 Ejusdem generis
 Expressio unius Est Exclusio Alterius
 Generalia specialibus Non derogant
 Harmonious construction
 Two provisions in the same statute which
are contrary to each other, the court will
try to construe the provisions in such a
manner as to give effect to both by
harmonising each other.
 A construction which produce greater
harmony and least inconsistency b/w
statutes to be accepted by courts.
 The statute must be read as a
whole
 A provision in a statute cannot be
interpreted in isolation because it may
lead to undesirable results not intended by
the legislature
 Noscitur a sociis
 legal maxim
 A word may be known by the company it
keeps
o Same word need not always have the same
meaning
o Differ according to context- even if repeated
in same section
 A particular context may control an
ordinary meaning
 Ejusdem generis
 Of the same kind
 Operates to restrict the meaning of general
words to things or matters of the same kind
(genus) as the preceding particular words
unless there is something to show that a wider
sense is intended
 If there are no general words at the end of a
list, only things in the list are covered by the
legislation
 expressio unius exclusio alteris (expression of
one excludes others
Powell v. Kempton Racecourse(1899)

 The words other place were held to mean

‘other indoor place’ because the list
referred to a ‘house, office, room or other
place’ and ‘house’, ‘office’, ‘room’ are all
indoors
 Expressio unius est exclusio
alterius
Means an express mention of one thing
implies the exclusion of another.
 where a mode of performing a duty is
laid down by law, it must be performed in
that mode or not at all.
 Generalia Specialibus non
derogant
 An enactment on any public need in the initial stage will
comprehend the general interest of all in the society and
treated as general law
 In due course of time, society may need some special
attention on certain issues or particular matters or
particular interest of selected few and results in special
Acts or particular Acts.
 General Act graciously gives way to the impact of special
Act and the special Act cordially coexists with the
general Act
 The general act should not be construed as repealing or
altering the special Act and viceversa.
 Rule of Beneficial Construction
 A method of understanding the words and
meaning with broad perspective and public good
avoiding strict sentiments and propositions.
 Added for the progression of the society
 A tendency rather than a rule
 Where the language used by the legislature fails
to achieve the object of a statute, a more
extended meaning could be given to achieve
that object which the language is fairly
susceptable to.
 Nisbet v. Rayne & Burn
 Intrinsic and Extrinsic aid
 They use intrinsic ( definitions within
statute) and /or Extrinsic aids (things
outside such as dictionary)
 Boy wearing turban- race-ethnicity- long
shared history from a particular region
 Ratio decedenti & obitur dicta.
 Conclusion
 Main Rules
 Litera legis/Grammatical rule
 Logical rule/Golden rule
 Mischief Rule

 Other general rules

 Harmonious construction
 Noscitur a sociis
 Ejusdem generis etc.