IOS (5)

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES
Q. Discuss the meaning principle and types of legislation.
Ans. Introduction
Humans are social creatures who depend on each other for survival. This dependence creates
relationships. In modern society, it has become essential to regulate these relationships. As time
has passed, the relationships between individuals and groups have also evolved to include the
relationship between man and the state. In order to exercise control over its citizens and to
maintain authority, the state or the sovereign creates laws. This creation of laws is termed
legislation. It is one of the most important functions of the sovereign.
The people of India are the sovereign because the ultimate power rests with them. The
government is elected by the people of India and, hence, it becomes a medium through which
power is exercised. From a basic transaction between two individuals to massive contracts
between multinational companies, from the manufacturing of toothbrushes to the manufacturing
of rockets, everything is regulated by these laws. It is through these laws that the government
ensures the ideal behaviour of the citizens towards each other and towards the country. But it is
not only Parliament that makes laws. There are others entrusted with this duty. Also, there is
more than one type of legislation. Let’s take a look at these.
What is a legislation
The common meaning of “legislation” is the making of a law. It is made up of two words, “legis”
and “latum.” Legis means law and latum means making. Thus, legislation may be defined as the
promulgation of laws by an authority that is empowered to do so. It is made by the legislature in
anticipation of the needs of society. The legislation includes laws made by sources such as
precedents, customs, conventional laws, etc. The lawmaking body is known as the legislature.
Under the doctrine of separation of powers, legislation is one of the three important functions of
the government. These include:
 Legislature – It is the body that makes laws.
 Judiciary – It is the body that interprets laws.
 Executive – It is the body that applies laws.

1
Legislation can have a wide and narrow meaning. In its wide sense, it includes all the methods of
lawmaking. In its narrow sense, it includes laws made by the sovereign or subordinate legislator.
Let’s look at both in detail.
Wide Sense of Legislation
As we discussed above, it includes every method of lawmaking.
 Addition or alteration: Acts made by the Parliament that add to the existing laws or
alter them.
 Precedent set by Court: While judges pronounce judgement, they apply certain
principles to arrive at their decision. This decision then becomes a precedent to guide the
courts in future cases. This is also a method of lawmaking. For example, the landmark
judgement of the Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala laid down
the Doctrine of Basic Structure. This meant that no law made by Parliament could alter
the basic structure of the Constitution.
 Every other expression of the will of the Legislature: Every expression of the
legislature, whether directed to making rules or not, like Acts that ratify a treaty, declare
war, etc falls within the wide sense of legislation.
 Customs, rituals, and past practices can also be included in this broad sense. These
are mostly unwritten laws.
Narrow Sense of Legislation
In its strict sense, we look at legislation as a source of law. These include:
 Legal Rules: Laying down legal rules by the sovereign or subordinate legislator through
enactments or subordinate legislation.
 Enacted law: Statute law made by the Parliament or the State Legislature. It would not
include delegated legislation. Blackstone uses the terms “written and unwritten law” to
draw the distinction.
2
Types of legislation
As we have seen in the above section, ‘legislation’ can be divided into different types based on
its interpretation and function. Salmond said that legislation is either supreme or subordinate.
The first kind of division is on the basis of authority; i.e., into Supreme and Subordinate
legislation.
Supreme Legislation
It is the legislation that is made by the sovereign authority of the State. It cannot be repealed,
annulled, or controlled by any other legislative authority. For example, in India, the Parliament is
the supreme legislator.
Subordinate Legislation
It is also known as delegated legislation. This kind of legislation includes legislation made by
some other authority than the Supreme Legislator. The power of delegated legislation is given by
the Supreme Legislator to the Subordinate Legislator, and the latter has to work within the limits
set by the former. It can be altered or abrogated by the sovereign authority. It is important to note
that there is no provision in the Constitution that enables Parliament to delegate its powers, but
there is no provision that prevents it either. There are mostly five types of subordinate
legislation. These are:
Colonial Legislation
The countries which are colonised make laws to regulate their populace. These countries are
under the control of a different state and do not have supreme authority to make laws. Laws
made by these countries are subject to guidelines prepared by the state under whose control they
are. For example, the British Parliament was the supreme legislator when it ruled over colonies
and had given them powers to exercise self-governance. But the laws made by them could be
annulled or modified as per the wishes of the British Parliament.
3
Executive Legislation
The function of the executive is to implement the laws made by Parliament. Along with this, the
executive is also given subordinate legislative powers to make rules that supplement the supreme
legislation. Such powers are given to the executive in order to find the best possible way to
implement the supreme law. Some degree of autonomy is required when powers are delegated.
For example, the Defence of India Act.
Judicial Legislation
The judiciary also possesses certain delegated powers to make rules for their purposes. The
superior courts have the power to make rules for the regulation of their own procedure. This is
different from the legislative action of creating laws by precedent. For example, the Delhi High
Court Rules govern the Delhi High Court.
Municipal Legislation
Municipal bodies are entrusted with subordinate powers to establish laws specific to the districts
under their control. These bodies make bye-laws and such legislation may be termed municipal.
The range of subjects they deal with is immense. For example, town planning schemes, traffic,
cleanliness, buildings, etc.
Autonomous Legislation
The State can allow private institutions to make laws for their functioning. These institutions
include universities, the Railway Company, the Bar Council of India, the University Grants
Commission, etc. They can make bye-laws that are recognized and enforced by the courts. For
example, UGC Regulations by the University Grants Commission.
Conditional Legislation
Conditional legislation may also be called contingent legislation. In this type of legislation, a
statute provides powers to the administrative authority to determine when a law should be
applied or when it comes into force. but adds some specifications along with them. These
4
specifiers are conditions, and when these conditions are fulfilled, the powers of the delegated
authority become activated. Hence, the authority is empowered to determine, based on its own
judgement, whether these conditions are fulfilled or not.
Sub-delegated Legislation
This kind of delegation happens when an administrative authority on whom legislative powers
are conferred upon by Parliament further delegates these powers to another subordinate
authority. This is permitted only if the Parent Act contains provisions that enable such a kind of
delegation. The maxim, “delegatus non potestdelegare,” indicates that sub-delegation of powers
is not permissible, although the legislature can always provide for it.
5
Q. What is Golden Rule of interpretation? Explain with the help of

case laws.
Ans. Introduction
The judiciary in India plays a huge role in ensuring the just and fair treatment of the people. Its
decisions affect people in more ways than one. This is the reason that only people with the
required level of intellect and experience are chosen to be judges in courts. We are aware of the
regular judgements of the courts where they decide upon cases involving statutory applications.
Often, the wording of a particular Section of a statute is challenged and it is the duty of the court
to either expand, restrict or modify the meaning of the term, in order to ensure justice in the case
at hand. This power of the judiciary is essential to its function of interpreting laws made by the
Parliament. Sometimes the intention of the lawmaker is ambiguous due to the usage of vague
terms, and thus, it becomes necessary for someone to correct this mistake. To aid the judges in
deciding whether a term must be interpreted in a different way and what should be that
interpretation, the rules of interpretation were created by some great minds. In this article, we
shall look into what exactly the rules of interpretation are and specifically talk about one of the
main rules, i.e. the golden rule of interpretation.
What are the Rules of Interpretation
As per Salmond, “interpretation is the process by which the court seeks to ascertain the meaning
of legislation through the medium of the authoritative form in which it is expressed.” The word
‘interpretation’ is derived from the Latin term “interpretari” which means to explain or
understand. So when we say judges interpret the law, we mean judges try to ascertain the true
meaning of the words used in a statute.
It is important to note that judges do not get into the interpretation of statutes unless it is
necessary. If the language of a provision is unambiguous and clear as to the intention of the
maker, the courts do not try and modify it. Their duty to interpret arises only when the language
of the provision is unclear, vague or ambiguous. To guide the judges in using this discretion
6
appropriately, certain principles have been developed which we now refer to them as ‘rules of
interpretation’.
What is the Golden Rule of Interpretation
The golden rule of interpretation was propounded in the case of Grey v. Pearson by Lord
Wensleydale in the year 1957. This is why it is also known as Wensleydale’s Golden Rule. This
rule is the modification of the literal rule. The golden rule modifies the language of the words in
a statute to successfully interpret the actual meaning of the legislation. It takes into account the
context in which the words are used so that justice can be done to the intention of the legislation.
It is to be noted that the rule can be used only when the language of the statute is ambiguous or
grammatically incorrect. Thus the judges need to be extremely careful with their interpretation
and only exercise this power when it is absolutely necessary.
The golden rule can be applied in a narrow or a broad sense:
 Narrow approach – This approach is taken when the words in the statute are capable of
multiple interpretations. Through this approach, the judge is able to apply the meaning
which is clear and properly portrays the true intention of the statute. This approach was
used in the R v. Allen, (1872) case.
 Broad approach – This approach is taken when there exists only one possible
interpretation of a word. In some cases, the meaning might cause absurdity. In order to
avoid this problem, the judges can use this approach to modify the meaning of the word
but this modification should be limited and shouldn’t deviate from the actual intention of
the legislation. In Re. Sigsworth: Bedford v. Bedford (1954), this approach was used.
The golden rule of interpretation is the second step after the literal rule. As we’ve discussed, the
literal rule would apply only when the plain meaning of the word gives justice to the intention of
the legislation. When the literal rule fails due to the existence of multiple meanings of a word in
the statute, the golden rule is to be applied.
7
Advantages of the Golden Rule
 An apparent advantage of the rule is that it allows the judge to modify the meaning of
words to remove absurdity and apply the modified term effectively in the case at hand.
 When the literal rule of interpretation fails to achieve clarity, the golden rule steps in to
help the court.
 It guides the judges in applying appropriate principles while interpreting the meaning of
the statute.
 It takes away the requirement of amending the legislation to make minute changes as the
judges can do that for the Parliament. For example, in the R v. Allen case discussed
above, the Court stepped in and closed the loopholes by applying the golden rule. The
interpretation was in line with the original intention of the Parliament. Thus, no
amendments were required.
Disadvantages of the Golden Rule
 The golden rule is restricted in its use as it can be used only when the literal rule leads to
ambiguities in interpretation. Its use thus becomes limited and rare.
 It is unpredictable and lacks guidelines.
 One of the main disadvantages of the rule is that judges can twist the meaning of the
words and change the law. This would cause a misbalance in the separation of powers.
Important case laws related to the Golden Rule of Interpretation
State of Punjab v. Qaiser Jehan Begum (1963)
Facts of the case
 The respondents were the owners of 55 bighas and 7 biswas of land in two villages.
 Their lands along with nearby lands were acquired by the appellant for his use.
 The respondents were not informed about the acquisition and were not present at the time
of the award.
8
 The Collector awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 96 per acre but the respondents a
year later contended the valuation of their lands. The senior subordinate judge rejected
their application as it was already 6 months since the sale and was thus beyond the period
of limitation as per Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Issue of the case
 Whether the limitation period starts from the day of sale or from the day of getting the
knowledge of the award.
Judgement
 The Supreme Court held that the parties must first come to know the award in order to
make an application for reference under Section 18. The parties were not informed of the
award by notice.
 Since the parties got to know of the award on a later date, the limitation period for
Section 18 would start from this date and not the date on which the compensation was
awarded.
 In this case, the Court applied the golden rule to modify the meaning of the provision to
include the start of the limitation period from the date of receiving the notice of award.
Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar (1962)
Facts of the case
 The appellant and his brother assaulted one person who suffered grievous injuries.
 The appellant and his brother were charged with Section 307 & Section 326, and Section
324 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 respectively.
 It was also found that the younger brother, 19, had no intention to cause hurt, and was
thus, only charged with Section 324.
 The appellant contended that the younger brother’s age was under 21 at the date of the
offence and thus Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 should be applied.
9
Issue of the case
 Whether the age of the accused is to be determined on the date of the offence or the date
of the guilty verdict.
Judgement
 The Supreme Court in this case decided that the age of the younger brother was below 21
years of age and thus, Section 6 was applicable to him.
 The Court applied the golden rule to allow the accused to claim the benefit under Section
6 of the Act by stating that the determination of age for this Section should be done on
the date of the guilty verdict and not the date of offence.
10
Q. (a) Ejusdem Generis
(b) In pari materia

Ans.
The term "ejusdem generis" means "of the same kind". Where a series of word; employed in the
language of a provision constitute a particular class or category or genus and they are followed
by a general word, then the meaning of such general word is limited to that class or category
only. To explain it further, if a number of enumerations belonging to same genus are used in a
provision, the meaning of general word following them gets restricted to that genus itself. For
example, in the expression "bread, butter, jam etc." a series of words are used which are edibles.
Therefore they constitute one genus. These word are followed by the word “etc”.which is a
general word. The word "etc” may carry any meaning but restricted to edibles only. For example,
"etc." may mean "biscuit" or "cake" since they are also edibles but it cannot mean "sari". Thus a
general word, which would otherwise have borne vast meaning, has been restricted to that
meaning only which fall in the same class or genus. This rule is called ejusdem genenis.
Conditions for Application of Ejusdem Generis
The rule of ejusdem generis can be applied only when following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) There should be a series of enumerations.
(b) All enumerations must constitute a genus or category or class.
(c) The general, word must have been used after that series of enumeration forming one genus.
(d) The rule shall have no application if there is only one enumeration because single species
shall not constitute a genus.
(e) The rule cannot be applied where several enumerations of specified things preceding, general
word belong to different categories.
11
Application of the Rule of Ejusdem Generis
This rule has been effectively applied in following cases.
In A.G., v. Brown Section 43 of Customs (Consolidations) Act, 1876, was construed in which
the words "arms, ammunition or gun powder or any other goods" were employed. It was held
that the words "any other goods" refer to goods similar to arms and ammunition or gun powder.
In LIC of India v. Retired LIC Officers Assn. the expression " other matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto" was preceded by expressions "scales of pay”, “dearness
allowance" and “other allowance”. It was held that the expression covers only those aspects
which have directs nexus with preceding expressions. Hence, gratuity not covered by the said
expression.
(b) In pari materia
Ans. “Pari” means same. “Materia means “Subject Matter”. Therefore “pari materia” means
“same subject matter” and “statutes in pari material” would refer to the statutes on same subject
matter.
Two statutes are said to be in pari materia when they deal with same subject, person or thing. It
is a settled rule of construction that while construing one provision of an Act, it is legitimate to
look into related provision in another Act on the same subject although those provisions may be
available in different Acts. In other words, if related provisions may be available, they can be
read together for the purpose of construction and for arriving at the true intent of Legislature.
The statutes in pari materia can be lawfully referred to determine the meaning of an ambiguous
word. In other words, in order to resolve an ambiguity, help can be taken from other statutes
also, provided that they are in pari materia i.e., on the same subject matter. The meaning of an
uncertain word cannot be imported from any other statute. Only the statute in pari materia could
be legitimately called in aid.
12
In United Society v. Eagle Bank, it was observed that statutes are in pari materia which relate to
same person or thing or to the same class of person or things.
In State of Punjab v. Okara Grain Buyers Syndicate Ltd., Okara, it was held that when two
legislations are of differing scopes, it cannot be said they are in pari materia.
In Shah and Co., Bombay v. State of Maharashtra, the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging
House Rate Control Act, 1947 and Bombay Land Acquisition Act, 1948 were not held to be Acts
in pari materia as they do not relate to the same person or thing or to same class or persons or
things.
Merits of the Rule of Reference to Statutes in Pari Materia
There are certain merits of this rule, which can be summarized as under:
(a) it avoids contradiction between a series of statutes dealing with the same subject
(b) it allows use of earlier statute to throw light on the meaning of a phrases used in later statute
in the same context.
(c) It permits a presumption that the meaning of the same word in later statute is same as it was
in earlier one, if context remains the same.
(d) Help from earlier statutes if in pari materia may be taken if used in same context
13
Q Science of Legislation:Jerry Bentham
Ans. Introduction The English jurist, utilitarian philosopher, and social reformer Jeremy
Bentham is recognized as the most important character in the history of British Legal Positivism.
He was a reformer and legislator, a moralist, philosopher, and a hedonist who commended and
condemned all actions and activities in the name of good (usually defined as happiness). He was
a key theorist in Anglo-American legal philosophy and one of utilitarianism's founders. The
Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation is his most important theoretical work,
in which he describes and develops the theory of the greatest happiness principle.
Jeremy Bentham marked the beginning of a new era in English legal theory. In the modern
understanding of the term, he is regarded as the originator of positivism. Austin owes a great deal
to Jeremy Bentham, and many of his arguments are just the 'para-phasing of Bentham's theory.'
Bentham's greatest works demonstrate that, contrary to popular belief, he is the true father of
analytical positivism, rather than John Austin.
Utilitarianism Theory
As an individualist, Bentham felt that the purpose of legislation is to free people from their
enslavement and restrictions on their freedom. The goal of a utilitarian philosophy is to improve
society as a whole. It would say that an action is right if it makes the largest amount of people in
a community or group happy. He believed in the economic idea of 'laissez-faire,' which meant
that the government should meddle as little as possible in people's economic activity. The
utilitarian principle was proposed by Jeremy Bentham.
According to this theory, the proper goal of legislation is to implement the utility principle. To
put it another way, the proper goal of all laws is to promote the 'largest happiness of the greatest
number.' 'Utility,' according to Bentham, is "a thing's property or tendency to avert some evil or
procure some benefit." According to him, the outcomes of good and evil are 'pleasure' and 'pain,'
respectively. The government's job, according to utilitarianism, is to enhance the happiness of
14
society. If there is a commotion, the state has complete authority to punish the perpetrators. The
Felicific Calculus could be used to calculate pain and pleasure.
Concept Of Utilitarianism By Jeremy Bentham
Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher, economist, social reformer, and legal theorist born
in London in 1748. Bentham being an individualist, supported the ‘leissez-faire’ a French term,
which, if translated, means “to leave alone”; hence this principle means minimum interference of
the state in the economic activities of the individual. Jeremy Bentham, in his book ‘An
Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation’ published in 1789, developed the
principle of “Utilitarianism” also known as the greatest happiness principle is based on morality
and ethics. According to utilitarianism, the proper goal of the legislation is to implement the
utility principle, or we can say that the proper end of every law is the increase of the ‘greatest
happiness’ of the ‘greatest number’. Bentham, in his book, wrote that nature has placed mankind
under the governance of two sovereigns, “pleasure and pain” for Bentham, the concept of
pleasure and pain is both physical and spiritual. The principle of utility regards goods as which
produces the greatest amount of pleasure and minimum amount of pain and evil as which
produces the only greatest amount of pain and no pleasure. He further stated that rights are
created by law, not by nature. As all humans seek more pleasure and avoid pain, the pleasure-
pain theory explains how people behave i.e., psychological hedonism and how people should
behave i.e. ethical hedonism. Thus, the principle of utility means behaviours are right in so far as
they promote happiness and pleasure and vice versa. Now by this, we can conclude that the
government which provides and promote the greatest number of pleasure and happiness is the
best as it does not focus on self-interest or individual happiness rather, it talks about the
happiness and pleasure of everyone. He added that government exists because it seeks to
improve people’s pleasure, not because of any social contract by this, he rejected social contract
theory.
Thus, the Three Generally Accepted Axioms of Utilitarianism are
 Pleasure, or happiness, is the only thing that has intrinsic value.
 Actions are right if they promote happiness and wrong if they promote unhappiness.
15
 The happiness of everyone counts equally.
Bentham talks about felicific calculus to evaluate both the sovereign quantitatively, and he
provided seven criteria, namely; Intensity, duration, certainty, proximity, productiveness, purity,
and extent, examines the concept of punishment and when it should be applied, as well as
whether a punishment will cause society to experience greater pleasure or pain. For him, the
degree of pleasure of a kid playing on the ground and a person reading poetry is the same. The
doctrine of utility is only concerned with the end result, the result in the achievement of the
greatest happiness of the greatest number, and the motive is irrelevant.
Criticism
There is various criticism of the doctrine of utilitarianism few of them are as follows;
 The nature of man is a complex phenomenon and is not merely limited to seeking
pleasure and avoiding pain.
 It only talks about the quantitative measure of happiness and pleasure and wholly avoided
qualitative validity.
 Overlooked human desires and these personal desires should be disregarded for the
common benefit of the largest number of men.
 According to Mill, if time is spent determining the best course of action, the opportunity
to take the optimal course of action will have passed.
 A person’s satisfaction is not a part of any bigger satisfaction. As a result, the process of
totalling up the diverse joys of multiple persons becomes difficult because both pain and
happiness are essential to and inseparable from the awareness in which they are felt.
 It is difficult to properly differentiate the pain and pleasure of each and every feeling.
 Motive is irrelevant.
 The calculation to determine pleasure and happiness is impossible as the consequences

are inherently unknowable, which Daniel Dennett referred to as the Three Mile Island
effect.
16
 Rejection of human rights led to the undermined foundation of a free society, as pointed
out by the historian Gertrude Himmelfarb.
 Ignored minority interest.
 No scope for Gray to create a black-and-white construct of morality either something is

wrong or it is right.
The principle of utilitarianism opposes ‘Retributive Theory’ and states that rational punishment
is to prevent further crime. It emphasizes formulating better policies and making informed
decisions, as the first priority of the government is to maximize the happiness i.e., benefits for
the greatest number of people from programs and policies and at the same time minimize the
pain i.e., losses and damages. It also helps in formulating policies for the welfare of the
maximum number of people with quick implementation. It also supports democracy as a way of
making the interest of the government coincide with the general interest.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, after observing the above facts, it can be concluded that utilitarianism
provides an alternative to the theories like natural rights, natural law, and social contract theory.
Furthermore, it cannot be ignored that there are various laws that are inconsistent with
fundamental rights but are constitutionally valid because of maintaining social peace and order in
society. Thus, we can say that utilitarianism theory is valuable in formulating specific policies
for the well-being of a large number of people but cannot be treated as the end.
Impact of utilitarianism on India
Wendy Doniger’s book, The Hindus: An Alternative History drew a lot of attention.
Though Article 19(1), the Indian Constitution memorializes the fundamental right of freedom of
expression it was quite disappointing that the supposed vanguards and protectors of ‘freedom of
expression’ yielded and Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code was applied. Democracy is the
government of the people but is not a form of majoritarianism where what is right or wrong is
decided according to the interests of the majority.
17
Moreover, in the recent cases of sedition, even utterance of the words, “Pakistan Zindabad” is
considered to be a seditious act depending on the masses. The objective of the principle of law is
lost in the case of utilitarianism. India is a country that follows a positive theory of law and the
Constitution of India holds the supreme authority. The Courts take decisions within the ambit of
the law of the land. Thus, the view of the majority hold’s no essence in the judiciary. Moreover
in democracy, the voice of each individual of the country holds an equal position. The vote of
each citizen is equivalent irrespective of any basis. Thus, in India majoritarianism holds no
relevance, however, its influence can be reflected in cases of sedition and fundamental rights.
18
Q. Explain in detail the meaning and different types of statutes.
Ans. 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.
In the Indian Constitution, the term “Statute” is not used; instead, the term “law” is employed.
According to Article 13(3)(a) of the Indian Constitution, the definition of “law” includes
ordinances, orders, by-laws, rules, regulations, notifications, customs or practices that have the
power of law within the territory of India.
A Statute, essentially, represents the intent of the legislative body. It may include various
components, such as a short title, long title, preamble, marginal notes, section headings,
interpretation clauses, provisions, examples, exceptions, saving clauses, explanations, schedules
and punctuation. These elements collectively make up the content and structure of a statute.
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.
19
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.
20
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.
21
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.
22
Explanatory Statute
An explanatory statute is a law that explains another law. It’s created to fill in gaps or clarify
confusing parts of a previous law. An explanatory statute aims to make the meaning of an
expression used in an earlier law clearer. For instance, in Britain, the Royal Mines Act of 1688
was passed to encourage the mining of certain base metals. The Royal Mines Act of 1963 was
enacted to provide a better explanation of the earlier law.
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.
23
Q. Discuss the rule of harmonious construction of statute with

the help of decided cases.
Ans. Introduction:- The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction, a fundamental principle in legal
interpretation, plays a pivotal role in resolving conflicts and ambiguities within laws and statutes.
Interpretation and application of Harmonious Construction involve reconciling conflicting legal
provisions to uphold the overall intent of the law.
It ensures that different parts of a statute or legal framework work together cohesively. This
principle is essential in maintaining legal coherence and preventing inconsistencies in statutory
interpretation.
What is Doctrine of Harmonious Construction?
Parliament creates different laws and rules, along with constitutional provisions, using their
specific powers. While making these laws, it’s essential to be very careful, but sometimes
conflicts arise because these rules can overlap in their application. This happens because when
making these rules, lawmakers may not have foreseen every possible situation. To resolve these
conflicts, courts have developed certain principles and rules for interpreting laws. One such rule
is the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction.
When there’s a conflict between two or more laws or different parts of the same law, we need to
use the Rule of Harmonious Construction. Every law has a purpose and a legal intent and it
should be understood as a whole. When using the Harmonious Construction rule in the
interpretation of statutes, the interpretation should be consistent with all parts of the law. In cases
where it’s impossible to reconcile both provisions, the court’s decision on the matter prevails.
The underlying idea behind the Principle of Harmonious Construction is that the legislature
probably didn’t intend to create contradictions in its laws. The legislature’s intention is for every
provision to have an effect. However, when two provisions conflict, it may be impossible to
follow both of them and as a result, one provision becomes ineffective, which goes against the
fundamental principle of “ut res magis valeat quam pereat” (that a thing is better understood so
that it may have an effect than that it should be made void). Therefore, the court should interpret
24
the laws in a way that removes the inconsistency and allows both provisions to remain in force,
working together harmoniously.
Meaning of the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is an essential rule for interpreting statutes. This
doctrine states that when there’s a conflict between two or more statutes or between different
parts or provisions of a statute, we should interpret them in a way that harmonises them. This
means that when there are inconsistencies, we should try to reconcile the conflicting parts so that
one part doesn’t negate the purpose of another.
The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is rooted in a fundamental legal principle that every
statute is created with a specific purpose and intent. Therefore, it should be understood as a
whole. We usually assume that what Parliament gives with one hand, it doesn’t intend to take
away with the other. The goal is to give effect to all the provisions. To avoid conflicts, the
interpretation of the statute should be consistent with all its parts.
If it’s impossible to harmoniously interpret or reconcile the different parts or provisions, then it’s
the responsibility of the judiciary to make the final decision and give its judgment. Courts aim to
interpret the law in a way that resolves conflicts between the provisions, making the statute
consistent as a whole and ensuring it’s understood accordingly.
Origin of Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction has its origins in court interpretations of various
cases. Its creation can be traced back to the first amendment to the Constitution of India,
particularly the landmark case of Sri Shankari Prasad Singh Deo vs. Union of India (AIR 1951
SC 458). This case revolved around a conflict between Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV
(Directive Principles of State Policy) of the Indian Constitution.
In this case, the court applied the Harmonious Construction Rule to resolve the disagreement. It
concluded that Fundamental Rights, which are rights granted against the State, could be limited
under certain circumstances and modified by Parliament to align with constitutional provisions.
Both sets of rights were given importance and it was established that Fundamental Rights and
25
Directive Principles of State Policy are complementary aspects that must work together for the
greater good.
Principles that Govern the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
In the landmark case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/S Hindustan Bulk Carriers
(2000), the Supreme Court established five fundamental principles governing the rule of
harmonious construction:
1. Courts should make every effort to avoid conflicts between seemingly conflicting provisions
and should attempt to interpret these provisions in a way that harmonises them.
2. A provision in one section of the law should not be used to nullify a provision found in
another section unless the court is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences despite
diligent effort.
3. In cases where it’s impossible to completely reconcile inconsistencies between provisions, the
courts must interpret them in a manner that gives effect to both provisions to the greatest extent
possible.
4. Courts must consider that an interpretation rendering one provision redundant or useless goes
against the essence of harmonious construction and should be avoided.
5. Harmonising two contradictory provisions means preserving and not destroying any statutory
provision or rendering it ineffective.
Application of the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction in in Interpretation of Statutes
Courts have outlined specific procedures for the proper application of the Doctrine of
Harmonious Construction in the interpretation of statutes based on extensive review of various
case laws. These procedures are as follows:
Equal Importance: Both conflicting provisions should be given equal importance to minimise
their inconsistency.
Comprehensive Reading: Provisions that are fundamentally inconsistent or conflicting should

be read in their entirety and the entire enactment should be taken into account.
26
Broader Provision Consideration: When dealing with contradictory provisions, the court
should consider the provision with a broader scope or applicability.
Analysing the Broader Law: In the comparison between broad and narrow provisions, the court
should analyse the broader law to check for any additional considerations. If harmonising both
clauses can be achieved by giving them separate and full weight, no further analysis is needed.
This is because the legislature was well-aware of the situation they intended to address when
enacting the provisions and all provisions should be given full effect.
Non-Obstante Clause Usage: When one provision of the law appears to override the powers
conferred by another provision, a non-obstante clause should be applied if available.
Establishing Legislative Intent: It’s crucial for the court to determine the extent to which the
legislature intended to grant one provision overriding authority over another.
Case Laws
Sri Jagannath Temple Managing Committee v. Siddha Math and Others (2015)
In the case of Sri Jagannath Temple Managing Committee v. Siddha Math and Others (2015), a
conflict arose between the Sri Jagannath Temple Act, 1955 and the Orissa Estate Abolition Act,
1951. The Supreme Court found that Section 2(oo) of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act conflicted
with Sections 5 and 30 of the Shri Jagannath Temple Act, making it impossible for both
provisions to coexist. The Court applied the rule of harmonious construction but noted that when
statutes are irreconcilable, one must take precedence.
The Court identified that it was only the first part of the proviso in Section 2(oo) of the OEA Act
that contradicted the Jagannath Temple Act. If this part were given effect, it would render
Sections 5 and 30 of the Jagannath Temple Act meaningless. The Court emphasised that in cases
involving the application of specific and general laws, the court must scrutinise the nature of the
case. When two laws are in absolute conflict, the limitations and exceptions imposed by the
Legislature must be examined.
The Supreme Court held that the special provisions of the Jagannath Temple Act should prevail,
applying the principle of “generalia specialibus non derogant.”
27
State of Rajasthan v. Gopi Kishan Sen (1992)
In this case, the respondent was appointed as an untrained teacher in Rajasthan in 1972 and the
State of Rajasthan refused his salary claim based on the pay scale of Rs. 160-360/- per month,
which was granted only to trained teachers. Instead, the respondent was initially appointed at a
fixed salary of Rs. 130/- per month until he became trained, in accordance with the Rajasthan
Civil Services (New Pay Scales) Rules, 1969 and the Rajasthan Education Subordinate Service
Rules, 1971.
The High Court partially struck down the provision fixing the salary at Rs. 130/- per month as
discriminatory, ordering the appellant to pay the respondent at a higher rate from 1972 to 1982.
This decision was challenged by the appellant.
The Supreme Court emphasised the principle of harmonious construction to uphold and give
effect to all provisions without rendering any of them powerless. Rule 29 of the Rajasthan
Services Rules, 1951, regarding pay scale increments, was general, while the Rajasthan Civil
Services (New Pay Scales) Rules, 1969, had a special provision for untrained teachers. This case
invoked the maxim ‘generalibus specialia derogant,’ where a special provision prevails over a
general one on the same subject.
Conclusion
The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is a legal principle used to interpret conflicting or

seemingly contradictory provisions within laws or statutes in a way that reconciles them and
gives effect to all provisions, without rendering any of them meaningless. It aims to achieve a
harmonious balance between different legal provisions while upholding the overall intent and
purpose of the law.
Under this doctrine of Harmonious Construction in interpretation of statutes, courts strive to

avoid conflicts between provisions and when conflicts arise, they seek to interpret them in a
manner that preserves their coexistence and effectiveness. It is a fundamental principle of
statutory interpretation that helps maintain the coherence and integrity of a legal framework.
28
In essence, the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction ensures that legal provisions are interpreted
in a way that minimises inconsistency and promotes a comprehensive and coherent
understanding of the law’s intent, allowing different provisions to work together harmoniously.
29
Q. Literal Construction
Ans. Introduction:- The term “interpretation” comes from the Latin word “interpretari,” which
means “to explain” or “to comprehend.” Every law must be interpreted by the judge in the way
that it was intended. The aim of interpretation is to determine what the statute stands for, what
the flaw it seeks to correct, and what solution it seeks to promote.The fundamental rule in
drafting laws is that the words must be read and interpreted in their literal context. The judges’
first rule is the Literal Rule. Some jurists refer to the literal rule as the grammatical rule.
The plain meaning rule, also known as the literal rule, is one of three rules of statutory
construction traditionally applied by English courts.The other two are the “mischief rule” and the
“golden rule”.
The literal rule requires a judge to interpret what the law states “actually,” that is, in its plainest
form. The meaning of the law-givers is said to be better expressed by the words themselves.The
mechanism by which the courts attempt to determine the Legislature’s purpose through the
medium of the authoritative form in which it is articulated is known as interpretation or
construction. The law must be considered in its entirety under the literal rule of interpretation,
and judges cannot go beyond “litera legis”(letter of the law). The literal meaning is a method of
determining the statute’s “ratio legis.”(Reason for the law)
Literal Rule of Interpretation:
The Literal rule in interpreting statutes is to interpret them literally and grammatically, giving
words their usual and natural meaning. The Plain Meaning Rule is another name for this rule.
Examining the vocabulary and literal sense of the law is the first and most important step in the
interpretation process. The words in the legislation have their very own natural influence, and the
structure of an act is determined by how they are written. In the construction of laws and their
interpretation, there should be no additions or substitutions of terms. The most important rule is
to view words in their natural context. The definitions of the words should be clear in this rule,
and only one interpretation can be deduced.
30
Meaning of Literal Rule of Interpretation:
Legislators also provide “definitions” sections within statutes to prevent ambiguity. These
sections specifically describe the most relevant words used in the legislation. However, some
laws do not have a definitions section at all, or (quite generally) fail to describe a phrase. The
plain meaning rule is intended to direct courts when they are faced with a dispute over the
meaning of a phrase not specified by the law or a word contained within a definition.
The first and most basic rule of construction is that terms and phrases in technical legislation are
assumed to be used in their technical context if they have one, and in their ordinary meaning
otherwise, and the second is that phrases and sentences are to be construed according to grammar
laws. A statute’s terms must be granted their ordinary sense prima facie. If the statute’s terms are
precise and unambiguous in themselves, nothing more can be done than to explain them in their
normal and ordinary context. It is a basic concept of statute creation that the definitions must be
read literally. The courts are required to interpret the terms as the legislature intended them to be
understood.
The advantages of the literal rule:
1. The literal rule enables the common man to understand the statue.
2. The intent of the legislature is simple and clear.
3. The literal rule respects the parliamentary supremacy in administration of justice.
4. Under literal rule the law is quite predictable.
The dis-advantages of the literal rule:
1. The literal rule can lead to unreasonable decision making.
2. The English language is ambiguous.
3. The application of literal meaning in all situations and circumstances is not possible.
4. The rule expects standards of unattainable perfection from the parliamentary draftsman.
31
The rules to be followed in literal rule of interpretation of statutes:
Ejusdem Generis:
Ejusdem Generis is where general words follow anenumeration of persons or things, by words of
a particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to be construed in their widest
extent, but are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the same general kind or class
as those specifically mentioned[10]. Ejusdem Generis means assuming general meaning of
words or words similar kind.
Casus Omissus:
Casus Omissus means cases omitted. Casus omissus also means a point not provided by the
statute. It is basically a situation not provided for by a statute or contract and therefore governed
by case-law or new-judge made law[11]. It is a canon of construction, requiring the court to draw
up principles of statutory construction, which are then going to be followed by subsequent judges
in their judicial decisions.
Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius:
Expressio unius est exclusio alterius, it is a maxim for ascertaining the intention of the
legislature. Where the statutory language is plain and the meaning clear, there is no scope for
applying the rule
Cases studies relating to literal rule of interpretation of statute:
R v. Harris (1863) 7C
In this case, the defendant bit the plaintiff’s nose. The statute made it an offence 'to stab cut or
wound' the court held that under the literal rule the act of biting did not come within the meaning
of stab cut or wound as these words implied an instrument had to be used. Therefore the
defendant was acquitted.
32
Fisher v. Bell (1961) 1 QB 394
In this case, the defendant displayed flick knife with price tag in his shop. The statute made it a
criminal offence to 'offer' such flick knives for sale. His conviction was quashed as goods on
display in shops are not 'offers' in the technical sense but an invitation to treat. The court applied
the literal rule of statutory interpretation in this case.
CIT v. T. V Sundaram Iyyengar (1975) 101 I.T.R 764 SC
The meaning of Literal Rule was given in this case as, "If the language of the statute is clear and
unambiguous, the Court cannot discard the plain meaning, even if it leads to an injustice."
Keshavji Ravji and Co. v. CIT (1990) Taxmann 87 SC
The meaning of literal rule is stated that, As long as there is no ambiguity in the statutory
language, resort to any interpretative process to unfold the legislative intent becomes
impermissible.
Conclusion:
The primary rule is the literal rule of interpretation. Courts view statutes in a literal and ordinary
way under this law of interpretation. They apply a universal interpretation of the statute’s terms.
The court is required to use the grammatical sense. The statutes should be interpreted as though
there were no other interpretation than the literal meaning. It’s an age-old and well-established
law of interpretation. It is used not only in England, but also in India, where it originated. Courts
must keep a few things in mind when interpreting statutes. It must understand that a clause is
only vague if it includes a word or expression that has several meanings. It is unclear if the
interpretation is susceptible to different interpretations in one context, but it is plain if it is
susceptible to different meanings in different contexts.
33
Q. Noscitur a sociis
Ans. Introduction:-
Noscitur a sociis is a legal principle that means we should understand the meaning of a vague or
unclear word in a contract or law by looking at the other words around it.
In simple terms, when we read a law or contract, we should think about how each word fits into
the whole sentence and not just what it means by itself. This helps us make sure we understand
the true intention of the law or contract.
Every word in a sentence has two things to consider: its actual meaning (denotation) and how it
fits into the sentence (connotation). Both of these things are important when we use the rule of
noscitur a sociis to figure out what a word means in a law or contract.
This rule is like a helper rule for understanding the law. It comes from Latin words: “noscitur”
means knowing, “a” means with and “socii” means association. So, noscitur a sociis means
“knowing with association.”
Noscitur a sociis Meaning
Noscitur a sociis means “it is known by its associates” or “a word is known by the company it
keeps.” This is a Latin principle and is often used in statutory interpretation and legal analysis to
determine the meaning of a particular word or phrase within a law or regulation by considering
the words and phrases that surround it in the same context.
In practical terms, when a word or term is unclear or ambiguous in a legal document, such as a
statute or contract, it is interpreted by looking at the other words, phrases or terms that are
associated with it in that specific provision. By examining how the word is used within the
context of the surrounding language, one can better understand its intended meaning and
purpose.
34
Illustration of noscitur a sociis
Example: Professor Graham explained the noscitur a sociis rule with an example involving an
insured person who becomes bankrupt and is unable to collect insurance proceeds in case of
“illness, disability or death.”
In legal terms, bankruptcy is seen as a form of disability because it prevents a person from
holding certain positions or offices. However, according to the noscitur a sociis rule, even though
bankruptcy is a form of disability, it doesn’t entitle someone to collect insurance because the
word “disability” is associated with “illness” and “death” in this context.
In simpler words, when we look at this law, we can see that “disability” here refers to a physical
incapacity, as it is closely connected to the concepts of “illness” and “death” mentioned
alongside it in the same provision.
Applicability of Rule of noscitur a sociis
The rule of noscitur a sociis is used when a word or phrase in a law can’t be understood on its
own. You need to consider the words around it to get the full meaning.
There’s another legal saying that supports this idea: “qua non valeant singular juna juvant,”
which means “words that are ineffective on their own become effective when considered
together.”
Application of Rule of noscitur a sociis in the Indian Judiciary
In the case of State of Assam v. Ranga Muhammad, the court applied the rule of noscitur a
sociis to determine whether the High Court needed to be consulted by the Governor when
transferring a sitting Judge. The court found that, in this context, the word “posting” was
associated with “appointments” and “promotions,” but it couldn’t be extended to include
“transfer.” Therefore, the Governor had to consult the High Court in such a situation.
In the case of MK Jagannath v. Govt. of Madras, the meaning of the term “any sale held
without leave of the court” was interpreted alongside the words “any attachment, distress or
execution put in force.” This interpretation implied that only sales involving court intervention
35
were covered by the section. Other sales, such as those to creditors, were considered outside the
scope of the section because they did not involve court intervention.
Conclusion
“Noscitur a sociis” is a valuable tool in legal interpretation because it helps ensure that the words
and phrases in a legal text are understood in a way that aligns with the overall legislative or
contractual intent, rather than in isolation, which could lead to misinterpretation or unintended
consequences.
It assists judges, lawyers and legal scholars in making sense of potentially ambiguous language
within the law.
36
Q. Stare Decisis
Ans.
Stare decisis is also known as the concept of precedent, which means the decision taken by the
higher courts shall be followed/binding on the lower courts, which stands as a precedent to the
lower courts. This gives the law finality and maintains consistency and permanence. Principle
settled, accepted, and acted upon for a long should not be easily departed from. While departing
from the settled law or practice, the courts cannot ignore the harm that is likely to happen by
unsettling the law that has been settled. This principle was initially coined in medieval England
and America, where the courts looked into the judgment of earlier cases as guidance also had the
power to reject those which they do not consider good or which they considered bad in their
judgment.
Historical background of Doctrine of Stare Decisis
 The desire for certainty & continuity in law gave rise to the doctrine of stare decisis.
Initially due to the lack of recording the decisions or judgement of cases in written form,
doctrine of stare decisis was not freely used, but after the concept of recording the
judgement came, widespread use of this doctrine was witnessed.
 In 1883 the urgent need for recognizing the binding force of precedents was brought into
notice in the case of Mirehouse v. Rennel.
 In India the concept of precedent established after the Britishers came to India, which
lead down the hierarchy of courts and the concept of higher courts judgement binding the
decision of the lower courts.
 In 1935 the Government of India Act, explicitly mentioned that the decision of Federal
Courts & Privy Council will be binding all the other Courts decision in British India.
Hence, from 18th century till date stare decisis is a characteristic feature of our legal system.
37
Following the Precedents has its own advantages and disadvantages too, here are some of those
advantages and disadvantages:
Advantages of Stare Decisis:
 It brought certainty and consistency in the law. A good decision-making body needs to
have consistency and avoid arbitrariness in its judgments.
 There is an orderly development of the law.
 It eliminates the element of ambiguity and enables the lower courts to follow the decision
of the higher court unanimously and without question.
Disadvantages of Stare Decisis:
 The first and foremost disadvantage of this doctrine and the precedent system is its
rigidity and unwillingness to allow change.
 Practical law is based on experience, by considering precedent the scope of experience
decreases which hampers the essence of practicing law
 Sometimes judicial decisions may be wrong and the same mistake is being continued in
the form of precedent law.
Case Laws
In the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others. (2011), it
was held by the Apex Court that the judgement of a bench that is larger in strength shall be
binding not only on a judgement of a bench smaller in strength but also on a Bench of Judges of
co-equal strength.
In the case of Pradip Chandra Parija v. Pramod Chandra Patnaik. If a decision proposed by
the bench with three judges has found to be incorrect by a two-judge bench, the latter cannot be
followed as the precedent. The issue can be legally addressed only by another three-judge bench.
38
Q. Doctrine Of Eclipse
Ans. Introduction:-
The Doctrine of Eclipse states that any law inconsistent with fundamental rights is not invalid. It
is not dead but overshadowed by the fundamental right.
The inconsistency (conflict) can be removed by constitutional amendment. The amendment to

the relevant fundamental right will remove the eclipse, and the entire law becomes valid.
What is the Doctrine of Eclipse?
The Doctrine of Eclipse is a legal principle in India that deals with the relationship between
fundamental rights and existing laws that may be inconsistent with them. The Doctrine of
Eclipse is addressed in Article 13(1) of the Indian Constitution.
According to the doctrine of the eclipse, if a law conflicts with the fundamental rights guaranteed
by the Indian Constitution, it does not automatically become null and void. Instead, it is
considered in a state of eclipse or overshadowed by fundamental rights.
If a statute is inconsistent with the provisions of Part III, it shall be deemed void. However, this
does not render the entire law null and void under this doctrine; only the portion inconsistent
with Part III of the Indian Constitution becomes void. The law is not abolished entirely but
remains dormant, subject to the discretion of the Parliament.
The doctrine states that while such a law exists, its enforceability is restricted. It becomes
unenforceable against citizens whose fundamental rights are violated by the law. However, it
may remain applicable to non-citizens who are not entitled to the same fundamental rights. The
doctrine does not entirely erase the law from the statute book but renders it dormant and
ineffective as it violates fundamental rights.
The Doctrine of Eclipse allows for remedying the conflict between the law and fundamental
rights through a constitutional amendment. Amending the relevant fundamental right removes
the eclipse, and the entire law becomes valid and enforceable again.
39
Origin and Evolution of the Doctrine of Eclipse
Judicial review has played a significant role in establishing and shaping the doctrine of eclipse.
While the formal pronouncement of this legal doctrine came in the case of Bhikaji Narain
Dhakras and Ors v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1955), traces of its origin can be found in
previous cases.
Application of the doctrine of the eclipse to the Indian Penal Code
In the case of P. Rathiram v. Union of India (1994), the constitutionality of Section 309 of the
Indian Penal Code, which criminalizes attempts to commit suicide, was challenged. The court
held that Section 309 violated Article 19, which includes the right to freedom of speech and the
right to remain silent. It was further argued that Section 309 was also in conflict with Article 21,
which encompasses the right to life, including the right to choose not to live.
However, this ruling was later invalidated in the case of Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab
(1996). The court held that the right to life under Article 21 does not include the right to die by
suicide. Therefore, the earlier decision in Rathiram case, which had eclipsed Section 309 with
fundamental rights, was effectively nullified by the Gian judgment.
Elements of Doctrine of Eclipse
The Doctrine of Eclipse encompasses several key elements:
 Pre-constitutional law: The doctrine applies to laws enacted before the Constitution’s
commencement.
 Conflict with fundamental rights: The law in question must directly conflict with the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
 Inoperativeness rather than nullity: The law does not become wholly invalid or null
and void. Instead, it becomes inoperative or unenforceable against citizens whose
fundamental rights are violated by the law.
 Potential for future operativeness: If there is an amendment to the relevant

fundamental right in the future, it automatically makes the previously impugned law
40
operative again. This means that the law can be enforced and applied once the conflict
with fundamental rights is resolved through a constitutional amendment.
Conclusion
The doctrine validates pre-constitution laws that violate the fundamental rights provided under
Part III of the Indian Constitution. Instead of being declared null and void from the beginning,
these laws are considered unenforceable and in a state of dormancy only to the extent of their
inconsistency with fundamental rights.
However, if the Parliament makes a subsequent amendment to the Constitution, removing the
inconsistency or conflict between the existing law and the fundamental rights, the eclipse
disappears. Once the inconsistency is resolved, the particular law becomes active and
enforceable.
In essence, the doctrine of eclipse provides a mechanism for temporarily suspending pre-
constitution laws that violate fundamental rights while allowing for their revival and validity
through constitutional amendments that remove the inconsistency.
41
Q. Doctrine of Severability
Ans. Introduction:-
The doctrine of severability is a fundamental legal principle that plays a crucial role in
addressing the constitutionality of laws when some provisions are inconsistent with the
Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution. It is a guiding framework used by courts to
determine the fate of a statute when certain parts of it violate constitutionally protected rights.
In this legal concept, the court seeks to strike a delicate balance between upholding the validity
of the law’s constitutionally sound aspects and removing the portions that contradict the
Fundamental Rights. The primary objective is to protect citizens’ rights while ensuring the
overall efficacy of the statute.
Throughout the evolution of Indian constitutional jurisprudence, several landmark cases and
constitutional amendments have shaped the understanding and application of the doctrine of
severability. The doctrine of severability is doctrine has significant implications for the
functioning of the Indian legal system and serves as a powerful tool to safeguard the supremacy
of the Constitution.
Meaning of Doctrine of Severability
The doctrine of severability deals with situations when some parts of a law or statute are found to
be unconstitutional due to a conflict with fundamental rights. In such cases, only the conflicting
or repugnant part of the law will be considered void by the courts, not the entire statute. It is also
called the doctrine of separability,
In simpler terms, if a specific part of a law violates the Constitution but can be separated from
the rest of the law without affecting its functionality, only that problematic part will be removed,
not the entire law.
Another aspect of the doctrine of severability is that if a law combines good and bad provisions
using words like ‘and’ or ‘or,’ and the enforcement of the good provision does not depend on the
bad one, they are considered severable. The good provision will be upheld and enforced even if
42
the bad one cannot or does not exist. On the other hand, if there’s a provision that can be used for
both legal and illegal purposes, it is invalid and cannot be allowed even for legal purposes.
In the doctrine of severability, the entire Act is not declared invalid for being inconsistent with
Part 3 of the Indian Constitution, which grants fundamental rights to the citizens. Only those
parts of the Act that violate fundamental rights are considered inconsistent. The court separates
the violative parts from the non-violative ones. If it is possible to separate the valid portion from
the invalid portion, then only the violative part is declared void while the rest remains in effect.
However, the court will declare the entire Act as void if the valid and invalid portions are so
intertwined that they cannot be separated. This legal process is known as the doctrine of
severability. It ensures that only the unconstitutional parts of the Act are struck down while
preserving the valid and constitutional aspects.
Landmark Cases on Doctrine of Severability
The honourable Supreme Court of India has applied the doctrine of severability in various cases:
A.K Gopalan vs State of Madras: The court held that if the preventive detention provision
(section 14) was removed, the rest of the Act would remain valid and effective. The violative
part was separable from the valid part.
D.S Nakara vs Union of India: The court declared the inconsistent portion of the Act as invalid,
as it could be easily separated from the valid part, leaving the rest of the Act intact.
State of Bombay vs F.N Balsara: In this case, the entire Act was declared void but did not
affect the other parts of the law. Only the violative provision was struck down.
Minerva Mills vs Union of India: The court struck down section 4 of 55 of the 42nd
Amendment Act, 1976, as it exceeded the amending power of Parliament. However, the
remaining provisions of the Act were upheld and considered valid.
43
Features of Doctrine of Severability
Applicability
Article 13(1) applies to any laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights. It prohibits the
Legislatures from enacting laws that violate the Fundamental Rights of the people. High Courts
and the Supreme Court can review statutes believed to infringe upon Fundamental Rights.
Nature of the Disputed Provision
For the disputed provision to be considered void, it must be shown to be inconsistent with the
Fundamental Rights. If this is not proven, the doctrine of severability would not apply.
Severability
If the disputed provision is inconsistent with Fundamental Rights, only that specific provision
will be considered void. The rest of the statute will remain in effect and enforceable. However,
suppose the disputed provision cannot be separated from the rest of the statute without making
the whole law inoperable or significantly less effective. In that case, the entire statute may be
struck down by the court.
The Burden of Proof
The person who brings the matter to the court and alleges that a statute violates Fundamental
Rights has the burden of proving it. They must demonstrate, based on the rationale of the case
of Chiranjit Lal Chowdhury v. The Union of India & Ors., that their Fundamental Rights
have been violated. They can also show that they could be subject to immediate danger due to a
statute or law coming into force.
Conclusion
The doctrine of severability is an important legal principle used to address the constitutionality of
statutes when some provisions are found to be inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights
guaranteed by the Constitution. When a specific provision of a statute violates fundamental
rights, the court can declare only that particular provision void, leaving the rest of the statute
44
intact and enforceable. The court’s intention is to separate the valid parts from the invalid ones to
preserve the constitutionally sound aspects of the law.
However, suppose the invalid provision is so intertwined with the rest of the statute that they
cannot be separated without rendering the entire law inoperable. In that case, the court may strike
down the entire statute. The burden of proof lies with the party challenging the law’s
constitutionality, and they must demonstrate that their fundamental rights have been violated.
Over the years, several landmark cases and constitutional amendments have shaped the
understanding of the doctrine of severability in India. While the Constitution explicitly excludes
certain laws from Article 13’s purview, amendments and judicial decisions have clarified that
even constitutional amendments are not immune from judicial review, especially if they damage
the basic structure of the Constitution.
45
Q. Doctrine of colourable legislation

Ans. Introduction
One of the bedrock concepts of the Indian Constitution that enroot and reinforce the doctrine of
colourable legislation is federalism. It is worth recalling that federalism is the system of
government driven by the two fundamental principles viz. Separation of Power, and checks and
balances. The collective apprehension of federalism provides that each governmental organ has
bestowed with powers, and none of the constituent units is allowed to interfere in the work
sphere of the other. It is pertinent to note that the federal government is the contrast of unitary
government i.e. in general; a federation has two levels of government, one at the centre and
another to control the province or state.
Unlike unitary, the checks and balances principle uphold the scheme of separation of powers as it
prescribes each organ to check the functioning of the other so that it can obviate the ultimate
despotism of one organ.
Doctrine of Colourable Legislation in Brief
As far as India is concerned, it is the union of states; nevertheless, states lack the right to secede
from the Indian federation. Undeniably, several common instruments exist between the union
and state viz. an integrated and independent judiciary, single and supremacy of the Constitution,
single citizenship, common election commission, so on. But, the Doctrine of separation of
powers plays a pivotal role as the Indian Constitution demarcates the authority and power among
the three governmental organs.
Pursuant to that, the primary function of the legislature is law-making, and that too with certain
limitations; this constitutes the basis of the Doctrine of Colourable legislation. Through the eyes
of K.C Wheare, “the method of dividing powers so that the general and regional governments are
each within a sphere coordinate and independent.” Article 246 of the Indian
Constitution delineates the legislative power-sharing between the Parliament and the state
legislatures under the scheme of the Seventh Schedule. This schedule contains three lists, namely
 List I or the Union List over which the Parliament has exclusive competence,
46
 List II or the State List over which the State Legislatures have exclusive competence and
 List III or the Concurrent List over which both the Parliament and the State Legislatures
have competence.
Thus, whenever a legislature attempts to surpass its jurisdiction, it attracts the Doctrine of
colourable legislation.
Illustration
Reiteratively, as per Article 246 of the Indian Constitution, the Union government has no
legislative power over the items contained in the State List and vice versa. Regardless, if ever
Union seeks to legislate upon a subject correlating the taxation of agricultural income (entry 46,
state list) by camouflaging its constitutionally conferred legislative power over taxation as a
whole (entry 82, union list), such legislation will attract the Doctrine of colourable legislation.
Case laws on Doctrine of Colourable Legislation
State of Tamil Nadu v. M. Rayappa Gounder,
In this case, the challenged Act was ‘The Madras Entertainment Act, 1939’. The high court
struck down this Act on the grounds that the concerned legislature overstretched its authority to
enact such an Act on a subject related to reassess the levied entertainment Tax.
Similarly, the Bihar Sathi Land Restoration Act was held invalid in the case of Ram Prasad v.
the State of Bihar,as it was legislative out of the legislature competency.
M.R. Balaji v. The State of Mysore,
The state of Mysore reserved 68% seats for the various backward classes, it was challenged in
this case. The Apex court held the impugned order as invalid since t it was violative of Article
15(4) and was quashed as a fraud on the Constitution.
47
Conclusion
The collective comprehension of the Doctrine of colourable legislation provides that the
Constitution distributed the power between the Parliament and the state legislatures. Both the
legislatures are bestowed with the absolute authority to act within its jurisdiction but limited
from transgressing the sphere of the other, no matter whether it is direct or indirect under a guise.
Thus, the legislative body is not allowed to legislate upon a subject matter, which has an effect
on the subject beyond its jurisdiction. If so, the Doctrine of colourable legislation will come into
action to fortify the constitutionally granted powers.
48
Q. Mischief and Strict Rule of Interpretation

Ans. The Mischief Rule of Interpretation of Statutes
The mischief rule focuses on determining the intention of lawmakers during the interpretation of
statutes. It originated in the United Kingdom in the 16th century and was established in
Heydon’s case. It was held that the primary aim of interpreting a statute should be to identify the
“mischief and defect” that the statute intended to address and provide an effective remedy. This
rule seeks to answer the question of what problem the previous law failed to cover, leading to the
enactment of the statute in question.
Heydon’s Case (1584) 3 CO REP outlined four points to be considered when interpreting a
statute:
 What was the common law before the enactment of the statute?
 What was the “mischief and defect” that the common law did not address?
 What remedy did the parliament intend to provide to rectify the problem?
 What is the true reason behind the remedy?
The use of this rule allows judges more flexibility in determining the lawmakers’ intent, rather
than being strictly bound by the literal and golden rules of interpretation.
However, this rule has been criticised on the grounds that it introduces uncertainty into the law
and grants excessive power to unelected judges, which is seen as undemocratic. Moreover, it is
considered outdated as the common law is no longer the primary source of law.
49
Strict Rule
The legal community has long engaged in discussion and consideration over the strict
interpretation of tax and penal laws. On the one hand, when serious financial obligations or
criminal consequences are involved, these rules must be interpreted with clarity and accuracy.
However, the notion of justice and fairness demands that people not be unnecessarily burdened
or punished by an excessively stringent interpretation of these rules.
This paper explores the idea of tight construction of tax and criminal laws, its importance, and
the current discussion around striking a balance between legal justice and accuracy.
Understanding strict interpretation
History of a strict interpretation of the law
Ancient Rome is where the idea of “strict construction” or “narrow interpretation” of legal
documents originated. In his “Institutiones” the Roman jurist Gaius stressed the need of applying
laws just to their express meanings and not interpreting them in a broader sense[1].
Strict construction rules were essential to the common law’s development in mediaeval England.
Judges like Sir Edward Coke played a significant role in emphasizing the importance of adhering
to the exact wording of legal texts.
The concept of strict construction is one of the numerous ideas that the English common law left
behind for the American legal system. Prominent individuals, such as Chief Justice John
Marshall in Marbury v. Madison (1803)[2], emphasised the need to interpret the Constitution
strictly.
In the United Kingdom, detailed guidelines for constructing statutes were established by the
Interpretation of Statutes Act, of 1850. It had clauses that encouraged interpreting criminal
legislation strictly and individual-beneficial statutes more broadly.
The benefits and drawbacks of tight construction have been examined by several legal
researchers in contemporary legal studies, and its use has changed throughout time. Debates
50
frequently centre on how to strike a balance between a purposeful approach and rigorous
interpretation.
Principle of strict interpretation
According to the legal principle of strict construction, contracts and laws should be interpreted
strictly and literally by their exact language. It emphasizes reading the language literally and
narrowly, without considering the intent, spirit, or larger context of the law or contract, only the
plain meaning of the text.
Strict construction aims to preclude sweeping or imaginative interpretations by restricting the

scope and applicability of laws or contracts to just that which is expressly and indisputably stated
in the text.
To prevent any overreach and guarantee that people are held to the precise provisions of the law
or contract, this principle is frequently applied in legal situations.
It’s essential to remember, nevertheless, that rigid construction does not always take the
legislative meaning or the practical effects of a given interpretation into account, which might
result in unfair or unexpected results.
To guarantee a fair and reasonable implementation of legal principles, it is frequently important

to strike a balance between rigorous interpretation and consideration of the purpose and meaning
of the law or contract.
When one uses a rigorous building methodology:
Literal Interpretation: The text’s exact wording is highlighted, and each word is given its
common, uncomplicated interpretation. The interpretation rigorously follows the text’s literal
phrasing without taking into account the text’s larger context, intent, or purpose.
Narrow Application: Strict construction restricts the text’s scope and application to what is
made clear and unequivocally clear in it. Generally speaking, interpretations that deviate from
the text’s actual wording should be avoided.
51
Avoiding Creative Interpretation: It disapproves of imaginative or broad readings that might

take the text beyond its plain meaning. Preventing unforeseen outcomes or excess is the aim.
Risk of inflexible conclusions: Strict construction can be used to prevent abuses and offer
clarity, but when used too rigidly, it can also result in inflexible and perhaps unfair conclusions
since it may fail to take the text’s meaning, spirit, or practical implications into account.
Balancing act: Legal interpretation in practice frequently entails striking a compromise between
rigorous construction and a more adaptable, purposeful interpretation that takes the larger
context, legislative intent, and justice principles into consideration. This harmony preserves legal
accuracy while guaranteeing a reasonable and equitable application of the law.
52

IOS (5)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOS (5)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

IOS (5)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

Q. Discuss the meaning principle and types of legislation.

 Legislature – It is the body that makes laws.

 Judiciary – It is the body that interprets laws.

 Executive – It is the body that applies laws.

Wide Sense of Legislation

As we discussed above, it includes every method of lawmaking.

Narrow Sense of Legislation

In its strict sense, we look at legislation as a source of law. These include:

Q. What is Golden Rule of interpretation? Explain with the help of

What are the Rules of Interpretation

What is the Golden Rule of Interpretation

The golden rule can be applied in a narrow or a broad sense:

Advantages of the Golden Rule

Disadvantages of the Golden Rule

Important case laws related to the Golden Rule of Interpretation

State of Punjab v. Qaiser Jehan Begum (1963)

Facts of the case

Issue of the case

Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar (1962)

Facts of the case

Issue of the case

Q. (a) Ejusdem Generis

(b) In pari materia

Conditions for Application of Ejusdem Generis

(a) There should be a series of enumerations.

(b) All enumerations must constitute a genus or category or class.

Application of the Rule of Ejusdem Generis

This rule has been effectively applied in following cases.

(b) In pari materia

Merits of the Rule of Reference to Statutes in Pari Materia

Q Science of Legislation:Jerry Bentham

Concept Of Utilitarianism By Jeremy Bentham

Thus, the Three Generally Accepted Axioms of Utilitarianism are

 Pleasure, or happiness, is the only thing that has intrinsic value.

 The happiness of everyone counts equally.

 The calculation to determine pleasure and happiness is impossible as the consequences

 Ignored minority interest.

 No scope for Gray to create a black-and-white construct of morality either something is

Impact of utilitarianism on India

Q. Explain in detail the meaning and different types of statutes.

Ans. What are Statutes?

What is the Classification of Statutes?

Classification of Statutes by Duration

Classification of Statutes by Method

Mandatory, Imperative or Obligatory Statute: A mandatory statute compels the performance

Directory or Permissive Statute: A directory statute merely provides guidance or permission

Classification of Statues with Reference to Object

Curative or Validating Statute

Q. Discuss the rule of harmonious construction of statute with

What is Doctrine of Harmonious Construction?

Meaning of the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Origin of Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Principles that Govern the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Application of the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction in in Interpretation of Statutes

Comprehensive Reading: Provisions that are fundamentally inconsistent or conflicting should

State of Rajasthan v. Gopi Kishan Sen (1992)

The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction is a legal principle used to interpret conflicting or

Under this doctrine of Harmonious Construction in interpretation of statutes, courts strive to

Literal Rule of Interpretation: