1

Subject: Interpretation of Statute

B.A.LL.B-Xth Sem
Subject Teacher: Akhlaqul Azam
Study Material of Unit-II(C)
Topic: Extrinsic or External Aid to Interpretation or Construction

Extrinsic or External Aid to Interpretation or Construction

When internal aids are not adequate, courts have to take recourse to external aids. They are very
useful tools for the interpretation or construction of statutory provisions. In B. Prabhakar Rao
and others v. State of A.P. and others(1986) 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.”

Further, in the case of District Mining Officer and others v. Tata Iron & Steel Co. and
another(2001), the 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.”

The history of legislation, the enactments which are repealed, the parliamentary debates,
dictionary commentaries etc. are external aids to construction. It is important to point out here
that the legislature adopts the device of making a statute by “reference” and by “incorporation”.
When the statute is incorporated in another statue by the legislature, the incorporated statute or
statute referred to therein is external aid for interpreting the statute in question. There has been a
controversy in India regarding the use of parliamentary debates for interpreting the Constitution.
It is now settled that the court can always refer to the debates in the legislature while interpreting
the statute to know the intention if there is a doubt about the provision. More often than not, a
provision is introduced in the Bill and after some debate either it is altered or modified or
 2

amended before finally it receives the assent of the President. Such external aids are helpful in
interpreting the law.

Where the Legislature has not chosen to define the expression the court of law have, therefore, to
fall back upon other aids for finding the intention of the Legislature; for example by reference to
the context and object and purpose of the legislative measure in question. The court may further
have resort to dictionaries and judicial interpretation of this award as used in other statutes; but it
cannot be denied that these methods are not as satisfactory as a precise and clear legislative
definition in the statute itself.

External Aids are –

1. Parliamentary History, Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances

If the wordings are ambiguous, the historical setting may be considered in order to arrive at the
proper construction, which covers parliamentary history, historical facts, statement of objects and
reasons, report of expert committees.

a) Parliamentary history means the includes conception of an idea, drafting of the bill, the
debates made, the amendments proposed, speech made by mover of the bill, etc. 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 Supreme Court in S.R. Chaudhuri v. State of Punjab and others (2001) 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.

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 in K.S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala and others (1995) that they are not
admissible as extrinsic aids to the interpretation of the statutory provision. However, speeches
 3

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.

b) Historical facts of the statute are the external circumstances in which it was enacted. The
object is to understand whether the statute in question was intended to alter the law or leave it
where it stood.

In order to arrive at the intention of the legislature, the state of law and judicial decisions
antecedent to and at the time the statute was passed are material matters to be considered.
Evidence of matters relating to such surrounding circumstances and historical investigation of
which judicial note can be taken by court, including reports of select committees and statements
of objects and reasons, can be resorted to for ascertaining such antecedent law and for
determining the intention of the legislature. But the bill and reports of select committee are not
legitimate material for arriving at the construction of a statute, that is, for finding the meaning of
words.

Parliamentary debates on the floor legislature are also inadmissible, because, the court is
concerned only with what the legislature actually said in the statute. Moreover, plain words in
the statute cannot be limited by any considerations of policy.

An erroneous assumption by the legislature as to the state of the law has no effect and would not
become a substantive enactment. In the construction of a statute the worst person to construe it is
the person who is responsible for its drafting. Courts sometimes make a distinction between
legislative debates and reports of committees and treat the latter as a more reliable or satisfactory
source of assistance. The speeches made by the members of the House in the course of the debate
are not admissible as extrinsic aids to the interpretation of statutory provisions.

It cannot be said that the acceptance or rejection of amendments to a Bill in the course of
Parliamentary proceedings forms part of the pre-enactment history of a statute and as such might
throw valuable light on the intention of the Legislature when the language used in the statute
admitted of more than one interpretation. The reason why a particular amendment was proposed
or accepted or rejected is often a matter of controversy and without the speeches bearing upon
the motion, it cannot be ascertained with any reasonable degree of certainty. And where the
 4

Legislature happens to be bicameral, the second Chamber may or may not have known of such
reason when it dealt with the measure.

In (Keats v. Lewis Merthbyr Consolidated Collieries Ltd. (1911) it was held that the external aid
in the form of historical facts and circumstances surrounding the legislation is necessary and
quite useful in understanding the subject matter of the statute and thereby to arrive at the
legislative intent.

2. Statement Of Objects And Reasons

Statement of objective and reasons provides why the statute is being brought to enactment. 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. The Statement of Objects and Reasons, seeks only to explain what reasons induced the
mover to introduce the bill in the House and what objects he sought to achieve. But those objects
and reasons may or may not correspond to the objective which the majority of members had in
view when they passed it into law. The Bill may have undergone radical changes during its
passage through the House or Houses, and there is no guarantee that the reasons which led to its
introduction and the objects thereby sought to be achieved have remained the same throughout
till the Bill emerges from the House as an Act of the Legislature, for they do not form part of the
Bill and are not voted upon by the members. The Statements of Objects and Reasons appended
to the Bill should be ruled out as an aid to the construction of a statute.

3. Reports of Commissions

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.

The Supreme Court in Rosy and another v. State of Kerala and others (2000) considered Law
Commission of India, 41st Report for interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1898

Earlier courts, while interpreting a provision in a statute used to refer legislative history to
ascertain its clear and complete meaning. The Traditional English Courts used to refer the report
 5

of a Committee presented to the Parliament/Legislature as an external aid. But the modern trend
seems to be that legislative history is not permissible as an aid to interpretation.

In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 ), the Supreme Court observed that the debates in
Parliament on a bill are not admissible for the construction of an act. However, it became
incompatible to the Supreme Court to refer legislative history as an aid, while interpreting a
provision in the statute.

4. Dictionary

The meaning of particular words in an Indian statute is to be found not so much in a strict
etymological propriety of language nor even in popular sense, as in the subject or occasion on
which they used. But it is well known that words are generally used in their ordinary sense and
therefore, though dictionaries are not to be taken as authoritative in regard to the meanings of the
words used in statutes, they may be consulted. In Voltas Ltd. v. Rolta India Ltd.(2014) the
Supreme Court has held that:

“Dictionaries can hardly be taken as authoritative exponents of the meanings of the words used
in legislative enactments for the plainest words may be controlled by a reference to the context.”

Therefore, the dictionaries are referred/consulted by the courts, whenever need arises to find out
the ordinary sense of the words. However, the courts must be very careful while referring the
dictionaries because the dictionary meaning of the word may not be true at all times in a
particular sense. If a word or an expression in an Act has been defined, there is no need to refer
the dictionary to find out its general meaning. One of the main objects of every dictionary of the
English Language is to give an adequate and comprehensive definition of every word contained
in it. Dictionaries are referred to, not only for meaning of the word, but also to find out the
general use of it.

5. Judicial Decisions

Decisions by courts on the same manner act as precedents for the interpretation of statutes.
Indian judicial pronouncements may have binding value when issued by a higher court, and have
persuasive value when issued by a court having same or lower authority. These foreign decisions
 6

from countries following the same system of jurisprudence have persuasive value only and
cannot be used to contradict binding Indian judgements.

Under this rule, a principle of law which has become settled by a series of decisions is generally
binding on the courts and should be followed in similar cases. The rule is based on expediency
and public policy. It is however not universally applicable. For example, if grievous wrong may
result, a court will not follow the previous decisions which, they are convinced, are erroneous.
While dealing with the provision of Sec. 207 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, Hon’ble Mr.
Justice C.K. Thakkar in the case of Ramkrishna Bus Transport and Ors v. State of Gujarat and
Ors, (1995) held that, whether a particular provision is mandatory or directory depends upon
intention of the Legislature and not only upon the language in which it is used. The meaning and
intention of the Legislature must be treated as decisive and they are to be ascertained not only
form the phraseology used but also by considering the nature, design and consequences which
would flow from construing it one way or the other. It is also true that in certain circumstances,
the expression ‘may’ can be construed as ‘shall’ or vice versa. At the same time, however, it
cannot be ignored that ordinarily ‘may’ should read as ‘may’ which is permissive and not
obligatory. For the purpose of giving effect to the clear intention of the legislature, ‘may’ can be
read as ‘shall’ or ‘must’.

In Mahadeolal Kanodia v. Administrator General of W.B., (1960) the Supreme Court was
concerned with the retrospectivity of law passed by the West Bengal Legislature concerning the
rights of tenants and in para 8 of the judgment the Supreme Court held that:

“The principles that have to be applied for interpretation of statutory provisions of this nature
are well established. The first of these is that statutory provisions creating substantive rights or
taking away substantive rights are ordinarily prospective; they are retrospective only if by
express words or by necessary implication...”

In Amireddi Raja Gopala Rao v. Amireddi Sitharamamma,(1965) a Constitution bench was

concerned with the issue as to whether the rights of maintenance of illegitimate sons of a Sudra
as available under the Mitakshara School of Hindu law were affected by introduction of Sections
4, 21 and 22 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The Court held that they were
not, and observed in as follows:
 7

“. ... a statute should be interpreted, if possible, so as to respect vested rights, and if the words
are open to another construction, such a construction should never be adopted.”

In the case of Narmada Bachao Andolan v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr., (2011) the
Supreme Court has observed that:

“The Court should not place reliance upon a judgment without discussing how the factual
situation first in with a fact situation of the decision on which reliance is placed, as it has to be
ascertained by analyzing all the material facts and the issues involved in the case and argued on
both sides. A judgment may not be followed in a given case if it has some distinguishing features.
A little difference in facts or additional facts may make a lot of difference to the presidential
value of a decision. A judgment of Court is not to be read as a statute, as it is to be remembered
that judicial utterances have been made in setting of the facts of a particular case. One
additional or different fact may make a world of difference between the conclusions in two cases.
Disposal of case by blindly placing reliance upon a decision is not proper.”

In the case of Sakshi v. Union of Inaia & Others, (2004) the Supreme Court has observed that:

“ Stare decisis is a well-known doctrine in legal jurisprudence. The doctrine of stare decisis,
meaning to stand by decided cases, rests upon the principle that law by which men are governed
should be fixed, definite and known, and that, when the law is declared by a court of competent
jurisdiction authorized to construe it, such declaration, in absence of palpable mistake or error,
is itself evidence of the law until changed by competent authority. It requires that rules of law
when clearly announced and established by a court of last resort should not be lightly
disregarded and set aside but should be adhered to and followed. What is precludes is that
where a principle of law has become established by a series of decisions, it is binding on the
courts and should be followed in similar cases. It is a wholesome doctrine which gives certainty
to law and guides the people to mould their affairs in future”.

6. Foreign decision/Judgments and Foreign Statutes-

Most of the Indian Legislations are modeled on the previous English Statutes. Similarly, the
principles laid down in many decisions of the common law courts in England have been
 8

approved and followed in Indian Courts. Therefore, the Indian legal system is the replica of the
English jurisprudence. Reference to English and American decisions may be made, because they
have the same system of jurisprudence as ours, but do not prevail when the language of the
Indian statute or enactment is clear. They are of assistance in elucidating general principles and
construing Acts in pari material. But Indian statutes should be interpreted with reference to the
facts of Indian life.

Before independence i.e before the establishment of the apex court in India, appeals from the
Indian High Courts were heard by the Privy Council were followed and applied in Indian Courts,
even after the independence till date. It is to be noted that a number of statutes in India,
substantial and procedural namely the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
etc. were drafted by the British Parliament, which are applied in Indian Courts.

7. Textbooks-

Sometimes, courts, while interpreting a statute refer textbooks authored by distinguished jurists
and eminent scholars, so as to arrive at a true meaning of an enactment. However, it is not
necessary that the meaning of the words given in the textbooks should correspond to the
views/opinions of the Courts. In certain cases, Vedas are quoted with approval by the courts. For
example- Manu Smriti, Agna Valkya Smriti, Jimutavahana, Vignaneswara, Kanitilya etc.

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

In this case, the Supreme Court referred a large number of textbooks. The majority opinion was
that, in view of many opinions and counter opinions expressed by the authors and jurists in the
textbooks, it was not desirable to follow the opinions quoted in the textbooks.

8. International Law: Treaties and Conventions

One of the most important branches of public law is International law. It is of two kinds- Public
International Law and Private International Law/Conflict of Law. International Law is a body of
rules and principles, which regulate the conduct and relations of the members of the International
Community (UNO or U.N.). The term convention literally means “the act of convening a
conference as assembly, representatives or delegates assembled for a common cause”. Eg-
United Nations Convention on Law of Sea, 1982. Whereas the term treaty means an agreement
 9

entered into between two or more states (countries) on a particular subject. Eg- an agreement
between India and Pakistan is called Indo-Pak Treaty.

9. Contemporanea Expositio or contemporaneous Exposition or Construction

The word ‘Contemporanea’ means “of the same time or the same period and the word exposition
or exposition means explanation. Hence, the expression ‘contemporanea expositio’ means
interpreting a statute or any other document by referring to the exposition it has received from
contemporary authority.”

The rule of Contemporanea Expositio was coined for the first time by Lord. Coke.

In R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antuley, (1984), the Supreme Court construed Section 21 of Indian Penal
Code, 1860 by referring to the principle of ‘Contemporanea Expositio’ and it was held that a
member of legislative assembly is not a public servant as defined in the section.

10. Government Circulars, Publications (Reports of Commissions and Committees)

Government Circulars, Publications and Reports have been considered as external aids in
construction of statutes. Hence, the courts, at the time of interpretation of statutes. Hence, the
Courts at the time of interpretation refer them, unless they do not go against the spirit of statute
under which they are issued.

In Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1958)- The Supreme Court referred the Press
Commission’s Report.

Therefore, it can be concluded that the importance of use of these aids is manifest. In any case,
where difficulty arises as to finding out the true intention of the legislature, the use of these
materials could be made by the Courts. Of course, in India, there is no consistent and uniform
approach to the use of extrinsic materials in the sense of determining as aids for the purpose of
interpretation of a given statute. Undoubtedly, individually as well as collectively, they are very
much useful in finding out the true intention of the legislature. Of course, recourse to these aids
could only be made in case of possibility of more than one interpretation of a given statute.

Probable Questions
 10

1. Define aid to interpretation and discuss the relevance of Extrinsic or External Aid to
Interpretation
2. Explain relevance of Parliamentary History as an aid to interpretation.
3. Briefly discuss kinds of Extrinsic or External Aid to Interpretation
4. Explain the relevance of following as aid to interpretation:
I. Dictionary
II. Text Books
III. Judicial Decisions
IV. Foreign Judgment