Interpretation of Statutes

Unit – I Introduction to Interpretation

Historical Overview of Interpretation in India

- Before divulging in the study of interpretation, we must trace the historical background of law
and interpretation in India.
- In India, the inception of law is attributed to the Vedic period.
- In the early 6th century B.C.E. Askapada Gautama had laid the foundation of the Nyaya
School of Hindu Philosophy and Jurisprudence and composed Nyaya Sutras which dealt with:
• Reason
• Logic
• Epistemology – the theory of knowledge and difference between justified belief and
opinion.
• Metaphysics – It is the branch of philosophy which deals with the first principle of things.
It basically involves the abstract theory with no basis in reality.
- The text comprises of 5 books, with 2 chapters in each and 528 aphoristic sutras.
- The book is the first structured book in mythology and philosophy.
- It includes tarka vidya, vaad vidya, and the theory of discussions.
- It is important to note amidst the theories mentioned above, Tarkashastra is also a concept that
needs to be taken into consideration.
- Tarkashastra is the science of dialectics, logic and reasoning. It is the art debate which
analyses the nature and sources of knowledge and its validity.
- Tarkashastra is derived from two words tarka meaning a debate or argument and shastra
meaning any teaching or command.
- It consists of six shastras and the four most important are:
• Vyakarana
• Vedanta
• Tarka
• Mimansa
- Tarkasamagraha is another foundational text of logic and the entire text involves the
guidelines for discourse.

________________

Note: A 'statute' is generic and collective, while 'act' is specific and singular. An act is thus a
statute, and the acts generated by a legislative body are collectively referred to as satutes, but 'act'
is normally used in the formal title of a statute. You could thus talk about 'the statute on rural land
use planning' or 'the statutes regarding rural land use planning', but the title(s) of the actual
statute(s) would be something such such as 'Rural Land Use Planning Act'.

1|Page
 Topic: 1 Introductory Considerations
Synopsis:
→ Introduction
→ Meaning of Interpretation
→ Object of Interpretation
→ Need for Interpretation
→ Meaning of Construction
→ Difference between Interpretation and Construction
→ Conclusion

Introduction:
- Interpretation is one of the most familiar features of law and legal practices.
- It helps in the administration of justice to understand the legal principles and use them
accordingly.
- It makes the understanding of any subject easy.
- It can be defined in the words of a layman as the process of ascertaining meaning to words and
phrases.

Meaning of Interpretation:
- Interpretation in the widest sense includes creative activities of the judges to modify or apply
law.
- In the narrower sense it means an explanation of words or phrases contained in any Act or
statute by the judge.
- It can also be defined as the art of finding out the true sense of any form of words, i.e. the
meaning that they want to convey in the text.
- According to Webster’s 3rd International Dictionary, interpretation means “To explain the
meaning of or to conceive in the light of individual belief, judgment or circumstance.”

INTERPRETATION = THE RESULT OF INTERPRETTING

- According to Cooley, “Interpretation is the art of finding out the true sense of any form of
words, i.e. the sense which the author intends to convey.
- According to Salmond, “Interpretation means the process by which the courts seek to ascertain
the meaning of legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed.”
- According to Barnett, “Interpretation is the activity of determining the linguistic meaning of
a legal text.”
- According to Parenis, “Interpretation is the linguistic or semantic meaning of contextual legal
text.”

2|Page
Object of Interpretation:
- To determine the true intention of the legislature and give effect to it.
- Words to be given their plain and ordinary meaning, unless there is an absurdity or ambiguity.
- Statutes to be read fully and in its own whole context.
- The main objective is to make the statutes workable.
- It also helps in the smooth justice delivery system.
- It also helps to develop law and meet the changing needs of the society.

Need for Interpretation:

- Complexity in the statutes and lack of technical knowledge to laymen.
- Changing circumstances and anticipation of the events if future.
- Attributing a single meaning to the words of phrases at times becomes impossible and leads to
ambiguity.

Meaning of Construction:
- Construction basically deals with drawing conclusions.
- It is the process of legal exposition and involves the determination of sense and reason in
various terms.
- It generally refers to deriving the literal meaning of the words used in a statute.
- In the words of Barnett, “Construction means the activity of translating the systematic content
of a legal text into legal rules, pragmatically in cases where the meaning of the text is vague.”
- According to Cooley, “Construction means drawing conclusions respecting subjects that lie
beyond direct expression of the text from the elements known from the given text; conclusions
which are in spirit though not in the letters of law.”
- According to Parenis, “Construction is the process by which gives any text a legal effect.”
- It can hereby be concluded that construction precedes interpretation and helps in studying a
statute in a better and efficient way.

Difference between Interpretation and Construction:

BASIS INTERPRETATION CONSTRUCTION

Meaning Identification of the true sense of a statute Drawing inferences of the

subject above the direct
expression

Determines Linguistic Meaning Legal Effect

When used Court complies with the single meaning of Ambiguous meanings of the
the legal text text are dealt with.

3|Page
Conclusion:
- Interpretation precedes construction.
- Interpretation deals with exploring the legal text while construction deals with determining
sense and explanation in the words of a statute.
- Both the concepts are of equal importance with regard to law.

______________

4|Page
 Topic: 2 Statute: Meaning, Parts & Typologies
Synopsis:
→ Introduction
→ Meaning of a Statute
→ Importance of a Statute
→ Disadvantages of a Statute
→ Parts of a Statute
→ Types of a Statute
→ Conclusion

Introduction:
- Parliament is the law making body.
- It is also the institution to withdraw any law from being in force.
- The Parliament may also fix the time limit for a statute and certain statutes may remain in
operation for an indefinite period of time.

Meaning of a Statute:
- Statute is defined as the source of law which consists in declaring the legal rules by a competent
authority.
- It may also be defined as the means by which the legislature formulates its final will.
- According to Halsbury’s, “Statute means a pronouncement by the sovereign in the Parliament,
the effect of which is either to declare a law or change the law formally.”
- In the words of Bouvier, “Statute means a law established by an act of the legislature.”
- According to Black’s Law Dictionary (6th ed.) “A Statute is a formal written enactment of a
legislative authority that governs a country, state, city, or county. Typically, statutes command
or prohibit something, or declare policy.”

Importance of a Statute:
- To create a new law and repeal existing laws.
- To anticipate emergencies and make laws for the same.
- Superior source of law and is easily accessible.
- Continues to be in operation unless repealed.
- It lays down law before the case arises.
- Statutory laws are more effective and efficient due to separation of powers.

Disadvantages of a Statute:
- Takes a long time to be formed.
- It is confusing and ambiguous for laymen.
- It is a good master but a bad servant.
- It is not easy to be repealed as it involves permission of both houses of legislature.

5|Page
Parts of a Statute:
- Title: Any statute begins with the title assigned to it. It basically gives an impression as to what
a statute is all about. It is of two types:
(i) Short Title: It includes the main title of a statute. It is the formal name given to a
statute. Eg: The Indian penal Code, 1860.
(ii) Long Title: This is more descriptive and is usually used to define the purpose and effect
of legislation. It is generally placed before the Preamble.
- Preamble: It is an important part of the statute and explains the reason for the enactment of
the state. It contains the objects and the purpose the statute seeks to achieve. It helps the
lawmakers to understand the scope and limitations of the statute as well.
- Definition Clause: Also known as the interpretation clause; usually provides the scope and
defines the various words used in a statute. The basic object of any definition is to:
o Explain the meaning of different words,
o Shorten the language to be used in a statute,
o Give official meaning to words.
The various types of definition are as follows:
o Restrictive Definition: A definition which restricts the scope of a definition and applies to
a particular thing. Basically these definitions contain the words ‘mean.’
o Extensive Definition: It is a definition which elaborates the meaning of words. Basically
these definitions include the words ‘to include.’
o Ambiguous Definition: A definition which is available for own interpretation. Eg: Sec. 2
(o) of The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 in Telco v. Registrar of
Restrictive Trade Agreements AIR 1977 SC 973 restrictive trade practice is to be
understood by applying the rule of reason.
- Headings: Each statute is divided into various parts and all the parts have sections and sub
sections. When each of the parts and sections have a separate identification, it is known as
heading. These headings play an important role in understanding the parts in which the statute
is divided.
- Marginal Notes: These notes appear on the left hand side of the section. If any section is
ambiguous, it can be understood with the help of these notes. It is basically the explanation of
the section in simple words.
- Section: The various parts in which s statute is divided is known as a section. However,
International and Constitutional Law are exceptions as they contain Articles.
- Punctuation Marks: If a statute is carefully punctuated, then there is no doubt about the
meaning of the expression contained within the statute. These marks are important because
with the help of these marks, the true intention of the legislature is known.
- Illustrations: It explains the principles laid down in the section. They are helpful for the reader
because with the help of these marks, the students get to know about the section and any doubt
regarding the sections are removed with the help of them.

6|Page
- Provisos: They are attached to any section for the purpose of explanation, subtraction or
addition of the provisions to the sections. It should be read along with the complete section in
order to have an entire understanding of the section. Provisos generally begin with the words
‘provided with.’
- Exception: These are basically the safeguards inserted in along with the main provisions of
the statutes in order to provide clarity to the provisions contained within the statute and
enumerates the exceptional circumstances as well.
- Explanation: These are used to clarify the various provisions of a statute where it is
contradictory to the provisions of the statute. It basically throws light upon the particular
provisions of a particular section of a statute.
- Schedules: They are basically the special provisions given to the existing provisions of a
statute. It gives additional powers to the existing provisions.

Types of Statutes:
(A) On the basis of Duration:
(i) Temporary Statutes: A statute is said to be of temporary nature when the duration is only
for a specified time period and expires on the expiry of the period unless repealed earlier.
Eg: The Finance Act, Annual Budget, Emergency Laws.
(ii) Permanent/Perpetual Statutes: Statutes are deemed to be permanent or perpetual when
no time is fixed for its duration and such a statute remains in force until it is repealed. Eg:
The Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(B) On the basis of Nature of Operation:

(i) Prospective Statutes: A statute which operates upon the acts and transactions which have
occurred when the statute takes effect. Eg: The Money Laundering Act, 2002.
(ii) Retrospective Statutes: A statute which covers the past events and even provides for the
remedies for the same although enacted after the occurrence of the event is known as a
retrospective statute. Eg: Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, 1950.
(iii) Directory Statutes: Any statute which merely directs or permits a thing to be done without
any compulsion and doesn’t impose any penalty on the non-observance of the provisions,
it is a directory statute. Eg: The Directive principles of State Policy. (Part IV)
(iv) Mandatory Statutes: Statutes which compel the performance of things or imposes any
duty to do certain things in a certain manner, it is known as a mandatory statute. In the case
of H. V. Kamath v. Ahmad Ishaque AIR 1955 SC 233, it was observed that mandatory
provisions must be strictly adhered to but directory provisions are for substantive
compliance only.

(C) On the basis of Application:

(i) Public Statutes: These statutes are those which relate to public policy or the local people
in general.

7|Page
(ii) Private Statutes: These statutes concern the matters of individual nature which has no
public consequence. Private statutes are basically made by the Parliament on individual
petitions for redressal of private grievances.
- It is important to note that in England, public statutes don’t need to be proved before the court
of law.

(D) On the basis of Object:

(i) Codifying Statute: It is a statute which codifies the law and presents an orderly and
authoritative statement of rules of law on a particular subject. Such statues aim to present
an orderly and authoritative statement of the leading rules of law on a given subject. The
draftsmen tries to incorporate the pre-existing statutory provisions and common law
principles as well. Eg: The Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
(ii) Consolidating Statute: It is a statute which consolidates the law on a particular subject at
one place and collects all the statutory enactments of a specific subject in a single statute.
Eg: The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The main purpose of this statute was to present
the whole body of statutory law on a subject completely repealing the earlier statute.
(iii) Declaratory Statute: It is a statute which removes the doubts in common law. Such
statutes becomes necessary when the expressions in the common law statutes are
ambiguous in nature. In the case of The Central bank of India v. Their Workmen AIR
1960 SC 12 it was held that a declaratory statute contains the words enacted, declared and
also the Preamble and its main object is to remove the doubts in law. Eg: Explanation of
Sec. 40 of The Income Tax Act was added by the Income Tax Amendment Act, 1961.
(iv) Remedial Statute: It is a statute where a new favour or a new remedy is conferred. The
main object of the statute is to make improvements in the enforcement of one’s rights or
redress wrongs or remove defects and mistakes in former laws. These statutes receive
liberal construction and doubts are resolved in the favour of the persons for whose benefit
the statute is enacted. Eg: The Employees Compensation Act, 1923; The Maternity Benefit
Act, 1961.
(v) Enabling Statute: These statutes enlarge common law where it is narrow. It makes the
doing of something lawful which would otherwise be unlawful. The legislature by such
statutes enables things to done. In the case of Bidi Leaves & Tobacco Merchants
Association v. State of Bombay AIR 1962 SC 486 it was held that enabling statutes not
only empowers but also ensures to do indispensable things for carrying out the object of
the statute. Eg: Sec. 49A (1) and 49A (2) of The Advocates Act, 1961; The Right to
Information Act, 2005.
(vi) Disabling Statute: Statutes which cut down or restricts the rights conferred by common
law and restrains the same. Eg: The UPZALR Act, 1950.
(vii) Penal Statute: Statutes which punish certain acts or wrongs. Such statutes are generally in
the form of comprehensive criminal code or large number of sections providing

8|Page
 punishments for various wrongs. Eg: The Indian Penal Code, 1860; The Food Adulteration
Act, 1954.
(viii) Taxing Statute: Statutes which impose taxes on certain transactions or incomes are known
as taxing statutes. The object of the statute is to collect revenue for the government. Taxes
are generally collected for public purposes leading to revenue generation in a state. Eg: The
Income Tax Act, 1961.
(ix) Explanatory Statute: It is a statute which explains the law. It is generally enacted to supply
an omission or clarify ambiguity regarding the meaning of the expressions used in the
statute. Eg: The Royal Mines Act, 1688 in Britain was re-enacted for better explanation by
The Royal Mines Act, 1963.
(x) Amending Statute: An amendment is a legislative act which is designed to change some
prior or existing law by either adding or subtracting some provisions. It is a statute which
makes an addition to or operates to change the original law and effect improvement to carry
out the purposes of the law more effectively. Eg: The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1983
& 2013
(xi) Repealing Statute: It is a statute which repeals or revokes the earlier statute. The repeal or
revocation may be express or implied; but the language should clearly state the necessary
implications as well. Eg: Cr.P.C, 1973 repealed and re-enacted Cr.P.C, 1898.
(xii) Curative/Validating Statute: Such statutes are passed to cure defects in the existing laws
or validate the legal proceedings. The purpose of these Acts are to remove the cases of
ineffectiveness or invalidity of actions or proceedings.

Conclusion:
- Inference is observed that a statute is the activity of determining the linguistic meaning to legal
text. It basically connotes the will of the legislature and explains its intention as well and
explain the probable connotations available to the legislature.
___________________

9|Page
 Topic: 3 Intention of the Legislature
Synopsis:
→ Introduction
→ Opinion of Jurists regarding Intention of Legislature
→ Leading Judicial Pronouncements
→ Conclusion

Introduction:
- In the year 1957, the Supreme Court had observed that a statute is to be constructed according
to the intent of those who make it.
- If a statutory provision is open to more than one meaning, then the court has to choose an
interpretation which represents the true intention of the legislature; basically the legal and true
meaning that is applicable.
- Intention of the legislature basically has two meanings:
o It carries the concept of meaning, i.e. what the words mean,
o It carries the purpose and object, i.e. the reason for which the statute was enacted.
- It is important to note that the evidence of the members of the legislature is irrelevant for the
purpose of the interpretation because:
o Judiciary is the final interpreter,
o Court can’t presume a single person to be accountable as the views vary from one person
to another.

Opinion of Jurists regarding the Intention of the Legislature:

- The expression “intention of the legislature” basically refers to the meaning of the words used
by the legislature in defining the object and contents of a statute.
- However, it is important to note that the task of determining the intention of the legislature is
not easy and various jurists have opined their own connotations regarding this phrase.
- In the words of Salmond, “Intention of the legislature is derived from the words of a statute.”
- In the words of Gajendragadhkar J., “Intention of the legislature is found in the words of a
statute.”
- In the words of Shukla and Katju J.J., “In the process of determining the true intention of the
legislature, one can’t go beyond the black letters of law.”
- In the words of Shukla J., “Intention of the legislature is a slippery phase.” This basically
means that the words used in a statute do not give actual picture of the intention of the
legislators and it is open to the courts for any interpretation.
- In the words of Holmes J., “Intention of the legislature is what the judge states while
pronouncing their judgment.”
Thus, closely analysing the definitions and the opinion of various jurists, it can be basically
connoted that intention of the legislature is basically deriving the words used in a statute.

10 | P a g e
Leading Judicial Pronouncements:
- In the case of R.M.D.C. v. Union of India AIR 1957 SC 628 it was held that sole reason for
interpreting the statutes is to find out the true intention of the legislature.
- In the case of Wazir Chand Mahajan v. Union of India AIR 1967 SC 990 it was held that the
intention of the legislature is to be derived from the words of a statute.
- In the case of Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India [Bhopal Gas Disaster] AIR 1990 SC 1480
it was held that in deriving an implied observation on the part of the government is to give
interim relief to the victims and this has to be derived from the scheme and language od Sec.
9 and 10 under The Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster Act, 1985.
- In the case of State of Jharkhand v. Govind Singh AIR 2005 SC 294 it was held that a statute
is an edict of the legislature and the elementary principle of interpretation is to gather the
scientia legis of the legislation.
- In the case of Ombalika Das v. Hulisa Shaw AIR 2002 SC 1685 it was held that where the
language of the statute is plain and explicit and not admitting any doubtful interpretation, the
court can’t change or amend its meaning.
- In the case of State of Kerala v. Mathai Vergese AIR 1987 SC 33 it was held that the court
can’t rewrite or redesign a section and can only look for scientia legis.
- In the case of Union of India v. Rajiv Kumar AIR 2003 SC 2917 it was held that it is a well-
established rule in law that the court can’t read anything in a statutory provision nor can it
rewrite a provision which is plain and ambiguous.

Conclusion:
Inference is observed that the intention of the legislature is the most important factor for the
administration of justice according to law. If the courts fail to derive the true intention of the
legislature it would only lead to miscarriage of justice and also defeat the main purpose of the
statute. The intention of the legislature must be gathered from the language itself. If the words are
clear and unambiguous, no separate interpretations are required.

__________________

11 | P a g e
 Topic: 4 Law making Process under The Constitution of India, 1950

- According to Article 107(1) an ordinary Bill may be introduced in either house of the
Parliament.
- Both the houses of the Parliament needs to pass the Bill before it is officially presented for the
Presidential Assent.
- After the introduction of the Bill, Member in-charge of the Bill may make any of the motions
below:
i. That it be taken into consideration
ii. That it be referred to Select Committee
iii. That it be referred to Joint Committee of the House with concurrence of the other House
iv. That it be circulated for the purpose of public opinion
- After this stage, there comes a Report by the Select Committee. After the Select Committee
has considered the Bill and submitted its port, a motion that the bill is returned must be taken
into consideration. In such situations, the clauses of the Bill are open for consideration and
amendment.
- If there is no amendment in the Bill, or if amendments required, the Member in charge may
move the motion that the Bill may be passed.
- This leads to a third reading of the Bill and then the Bill is considered as passed so far as the
house in which it has been originated is concerned.
- When a Bill is passed in one House, it is transmitted to the other House. The same stages are
undergone in the other house as well. This house may:
i. Reject the Bill. Then joint sitting according to Art. 108(1)(a) applies
ii. Pass the Bill with amendments. In such case, the bill will be returned to the originating
house and if the originating house accepts the changes, then it will be presented for
Presidential assent. [Art. 111] But, if there is disagreement, then a joint sitting is
ordered to resolve the deadlock. [Art. 108(1)(b)]
iii. Take no action on the Bill, (Lying on Table) and 6 months passes, the President
summons a joint sitting. [Art. 108(1)(c)]
- If a Bill is passed by both the houses either singly or jointly, as provided under Article 108, the
Bill is presented for Presidential Assent. If the President withholds his assent, the Bill comes
to an end. The Bill becomes an Act on his assent.
- However, he may send the bill for reconsideration, but if the Houses pass the Bill as it is then
he shall have no option than to give his assent to it.

_________________

12 | P a g e
 Topic: 5 Presumptions and Considerations
Synopsis:
→ Introduction
→ Meaning of Presumptions
→ Meaning of Considerations
→ Difference between Presumptions & Considerations
→ Presumptions in Statutes
→ Considerations in Statutes
→ Conclusion

Introduction:
- Presumptions basically means assuming something to be true.
- Consideration means a thought or a concern.
- Both presumptions and considerations are necessary in the interpretation of statutes because
while formulating any legal provision, the court and the legislature must deem certain things
to be true.
- Similarly, consideration is important because if the meaning of a provision is not interpreted
properly, it would result in hasty decisions.

Meaning of Presumptions:
- Presumptions basically mean assuming certain circumstances to be true.
- Any presumption is necessary because the courts need to interpret provisions with correctness
and certainty.
- In the words of Maxwell, presumptions are necessary in the determination of the general object
of the legislature or any meaning of a particular passage, the intention which appears to be in
accordance with the principles of justice, convenience and reason; shall be deemed to be the
true one.

Meaning of Considerations:
- Consideration literally means a thought or a concern.
- Courts must interpret statutory provisions with due attention to conclusions.
- If the courts adopt any construction without bearing in mind the proper outcome, it would be
dangerous.
- Courts need to interpret the provisions bearing in mind the true legislative intent.
- Absurd results may lead to inconvenience and so any conclusion must be true and proper.

Difference between Presumption and Consideration:

- Presumptions and considerations, although similar are clearly distinguishable.
- Presumptions basically mean an assumption with which the courts proceed to interpret any
statutory provision.

13 | P a g e
- Consideration on the contrary is a thought the courts must look into so that the true legislative
intent can be derived.
- Courts start with presumptions and end in considerations as a result.

Presumptions in Statutes:
- Presumption as to validity of a statute: Every statute enacted is presumed to be valid until
and unless it violates the provisions of the Constitution. Constitution being the supreme and
lex loci, all laws are subordinate to it. So, when a law which violates the provisions of the
Constitution, the court shall not hesitate to struck it down. However, the burden of proving
whether a law is ultra vires or not, lies with the person who challenges its constitutionality. In
the case of State of Maharashtra v. Bharat Shantilal Shah (2008) 13 SCC 5, it was held that
the presumption of constitutionality which exists, must always be in favour of the statute.
- Presumption as to Statutes being consistent with International Law: According to the well
settled rules of interpretation, it is presumed that the legislature doesn’t enact anything contrary
to International Law or common law realm. All enactments are presumed to be in consistent
with International Law. It is always presumed that the statutes shall not violate the well settled
principles of International Law. All general terms must be narrowed in construction so that
principles of International Law are not violated. A general presumption that always prevails is
that every person found in foreign land is subjected to and punished by that law of the land
until the person is within its territorial jurisdiction. In the case of Sarabjit Rick Singh v. Union
of India (2008)2 SCC 417 it was held that if a statute is to be read with an international treaty,
the provisions contained must be adhered to.
- Presumption that the Legislature doesn’t commit any Mistake: There is a strong
presumption that the legislature is a good writer in its own field and do not commit any mistake.
Words given by the legislature in the language of the statute has been used to employ the true
meaning of the intention of the legislature and the court has to read the language as it is and
give effect to the words used in the statute in its real and legal sense.
- Presumption that the words used by the Legislature bear ordinary meaning: It is
presumed that each word used by the legislature in the statute in its ordinary and natural sense
bears the same meaning, unless and until it is proved beyond reasonable doubt. The rule is that
the words used by the legislature should be given their true and natural meaning. True and
natural meaning also referred to as plain and simple meaning basically connotes literal and
popular meaning. The court should not proceed to attribute any other meaning other than the
words of the language of the statute. In the case of Ravi v. Ravi it was held that unless and
until there is a technical word, ordinary meaning of the words is to be kept.
- Presumption as to re-enactment: There is a presumption that when the legislature reproduces
the material of an earlier enactment into a subsequent Act, then it intends that those repeated
words shall mean the same what they meant in the previous Act as settled by judicial
construction. The court therefore should be slow to over-rule a previous decision on the
interpretation of a statute. In the case of Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh, Jalagaon & Ors. v.

14 | P a g e
 State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2001(1) Mh. L. J. 407, it was held that it is an established
principle of interpretation that when an amending Act alters the language of the statute, then,
the alteration must be taken to have been made deliberately. When the legislature substitutes
provisions in the Act, then it should be deemed to have been done with intention and motive.
- Presumption that vested rights are preserved: It is a presumption that the Legislature
doesn’t take away the vested or public rights given in a statute without proper compensation.
These rights are deemed to be preserved and a strong presumption prevails against the taking
away of the vested rights. Unless and until it has not been clearly specified, the vested rights
are preserved and not abrogated. In the words of Brett, “It is a proper rule of construction mot
to construe any Act of the Parliament as interfering with or injuring persons’ rights without
compensation unless one is obliged to construe it.”
- Presumption against retrospectivity: Legislature is competent to legislate both prospectively
and retrospectively. Retrospective law connotes those laws which intends to govern the
instances prior to its enactment. Whenever any retrospective law comes into force, it has to be
expressed in unequivocal terms. In the absence of such declaration, laws are deemed to be
prospective.
- Presumption as to the jurisdiction of courts: The term jurisdiction means the power or
authority conferred upon a court by the legislature to hear and determine the causes between
the parties to give judgment upon them. Basically, the term means the power of a court to hear,
try and determine a cause and adjudicate upon the same. Jurisdiction is basically of three types:
(i) Territorial: Jurisdiction with reference to place is known as territorial jurisdiction. The
power of a court can be defined in terms of its defined territorial limits.
(ii) Pecuniary: The jurisdiction with regard to value of money is pecuniary jurisdiction.
The court may be competent to take cognizance of a subject matter of prescribed or
restricted value.
(iii) Subject Matter: The courts may have jurisdiction with reference to a particular subject
matter and may be competent to deal with matters of specific kinds eg: Testamentary,
Matrimonial or Labour matters.
Whenever the jurisdiction of a court is challenged, then the burden to prove it lies with the
party questioning it. The court is competent to determine the question of its own jurisdiction
and may after hearing it decide whether it has or doesn’t have the jurisdiction to deal with the
matter pending before it.

Considerations in Statutes:
- Consideration as to Absurdity: The term absurd means unreasonable or foolish. It basically
refers to undesired or unexpected results. If the words of any statute is clear and unambiguous,
then the courts should proceed with the same interpretation. Courts must construe any section
according to the plain meaning of the language used irrespective of the consequences. But, if
an alternative meaning is reasonably possible and such construction would remove absurdity,
then such a construction is welcomed. In the case of Mohan Kumar Singhania v. Union of

15 | P a g e
 India AIR 1992 SC 1 it was held that the elementary rule of interpretation is that it is not
permissible to omit any part of a statute and general presumption is that it should be constructed
in its original and literal meaning unless and until there exists an ambiguity. In the case of
Jennings v. Kelly (1940) AC 206, it was held that the court has to be slow while omitting the
words of a statute as certain provisions with worthless meaning can be read as if the statute did
not exist.
- Consideration as to Reasonableness: The first rule of consideration of any enactment is to
give the words its original and natural meaning. It is only if the reasonable results are not
derived then some other interpretation is possible. Preference should always be given to
reasonable meaning if the provision is not plain and simple. Moreover, if the language of the
statute is clear and unambiguous, then then the court can’t presume the statute to be
unreasonable and neither can it interpret in a way which defeats the intention of the legislature.
- Consideration of Injustice: The intention of the legislature is not to cause injustice. However,
if injustice flows from the literal or grammatical construction, then it can’t be a ground for
disregarding the meaning of the statute. The plain intention of the legislature is to be derived
from the language of the statute which should give justice rather than a meaning which should
frustrate and defeat the ends of justice. Only if there is a possible for unjust results, then only
court should adopt a construction which is reasonably possible. In the case of D. C. Wadhwa
v. State of Bihar AIR 1987 SC 579 it was held that any ordinance which was not brought into
the house for a long time, the action was declared as null and void because it was deemed to
be a constitutional fraud.
- Consideration of Hardship: This consideration states that if the words of a statute are clear
and unambiguous, then the court should interpret the statute regardless its consequences. It
also incorporates the fact that the court can’t on its own will derive any possible conclusions
and if two meanings are possible then the one that reduces the hardship is followed. An
important aspect of this rule is that the court can’t legislate under the veil of interpretation. In
the case of Omprakash v. Radhachandran (2009) 15 SCC 66 it was held that sentiments or
sympathy alone can’t be the guiding force in determining the rights and liberties of a party
which were otherwise clear and unambiguous.
- Consideration of Inconvenience: When the language is explicit, the consequences are
irrelevant. Even if the results flowing from unambiguous language is inconvenient, the court
must enforce it. The argument of inconvenience is admissible only when the language is
ambiguous. If alternative constructions are possible owing to inconvenience of words, courts
should adopt the construction which is not leading to inconvenience. In the case of Rakesh v.
Jagdamba International Corporation AIR 2002 SC 2004, it was held that an unambiguous
provision should be read in a way which avoids inconvenience and injustice.
- Consideration of Anomaly: Anomaly basically means something which is illogical. Courts
in the general sense are bound to construe provisions according to plain and simple meaning
only. When the text is clear and then also an anomalous result follows, courts can’t be held
responsible for the same. But in cases where two constructions are permissible, then the

16 | P a g e
 construction which avoids anomalous results should be followed. In the case of Union of India
v. Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited (2008)7 SC 502 it was held that while interpretation,
anomaly and absurdity should be avoided.
- Consideration of Consequence: The judge can’t be interpreting a law keeping in mind
possible intention of the judgment. One can’t presume a consequence and give judgment. He
has to give judgments on the basis of facts and what is consistent with law. If two meanings
are possible, only then the courts shall think which one is suitable because the one which bear
proper consequence that shall be chosen.

Conclusion:
- Inference is observed that the presumptions and considerations are necessary for the
interpretation of statutes.
- If the presumptions and interpretations are not properly catered to that would result in wrong
and impractical judgments and would not help in proper determination of the rights of the
parties.

____________

17 | P a g e