UNIT 1: Theory of Law

i) What is Law?
Law may be defined as a large body of rules and regulations based mainly on general principles
of justice, fair play and convenience, which have been worked out and promulgated by
governmental bodies to regulate human activities and define what is, and what is not permissible
conduct in various situations.
In its judicial sense, 'Law' means a body of rules of conduct, action or behavior of persons, made
and enforced by the state.
It expresses a rule of human action.
It is something that touches our lives on a daily basis, it governs what we can and cannot do, it is
used to settle disputes, to punish and to govern the relationships between the parties.
Laws play a central role in social, political and economic life.

ii) How is it made?

Authority of 29 States and 7 Union Territories comes under the Union Government of India.
Government performs variety of functions such as:
1. Creating Laws and Order
2. Maintaining Laws and Order; and
3. Defend the Law.

To perform various functions, the Government of India has three branches. These branches are
known as Organs of Government. Each has its own specific function and administration.
Organs of Government:
1. Legislature
2. Executive
3. Judiciary

LEGISLATURE:
The legislative branch of government is responsible for enacting the laws of the state and
appropriating the money necessary to operate the government. The Legislative Branch of the

1
Indian Government is called The Indian Parliament. The powers of the legislative branch in India
are governed by the Parliament. The parliament consists of two houses and the
President. It includes the:
● President
● Lok Sabha
● Rajya Sabha

EXECUTIVE:
The executive branch is responsible for implementing and administering the public policy enacted
and funded by the legislative branch. The Prime Minister and his council of ministers are called
the temporary executives. The policies framed by the legislature are implemented by the
Executive. The members are elected every five 5 years. Permanent executives are those who work
under the Government of India. The Executive Branch is responsible for daily administration of
the State Bureaucracy. It includes:
● President
● Vice-President; and
● Prime Minister

JUDICIARY:
Judiciary is the adjudicating body of India which consists of the Supreme Court. The Supreme
Court includes chief justice and 30 associated justices, all appointed by the President. Judiciary
has the right to review and pass the bills which are passed by the Parliament. The judicial branch
is responsible for interpreting the constitution and laws and applying their interpretations to
controversies brought before it. Judicial branch of India is divided at various levels.
● Supreme Court
● High Court
● District Court

2
iii) Functions of Law.
A. Laws Protect Individual Rights and Freedoms:
The Bill at Rights was added from the US Constitution to guarantee many important protections.
These laws provide protection to individuals, from other persons, from organizations and even
from the government.

B. The Laws provide a Framework and Rules to Help Settle Disputes Between Individuals:
The laws create a system where individuals can bring their dispute to an impartial tactic, such as a
judge or jury. There are also more legal options where individuals work together to find a solution,
such as by using alternative dispute resolution (ADR). There are courts at every level, stranded
from local to federal. To decide who should win in a dispute.

C. Without Law there will be no way to Set the Standard:

It is fairly easy to see why murder and theft are crimes, but laws also provide a framework for
setting other types of standards. Without the Federal Code of Regulation, it would be difficult for
individuals or businesses to conduct transactions using banks. Federal regulations provide
enforceable rules and protections regarding taxes, commercial transactions, and employment laws,
insurance and other important areas.

D. Laws Help Societies to Maintain Order:

What will be the situation if there is no rule of law? You may need to provide your protection as
there will be no police force or army. Disputes are unavoidable in the life of society and it is the
role of the law to settle disputes. Thus, disagreements that are justiciable will be resolved by law
in court or out of court using alternative dispute settlement mechanisms.

E. Social Change:
A number of scholars agree about the role of law in modern society as an instrument to social
change. Law enables us to have purposive, planned, and directed social change. Flexibility of law
provides some measure of discretion in law to make it adaptable to social conditions. If law is rigid
and unalterable, it may not respond to changes spontaneously which may lead to resentment and

3
dissatisfaction among the subjects and may even result in violence or revolution. Therefore, some
amount of flexibility is inevitable in law

iv) Theories of Justice - Rawls

Rawls conceives justice as fairness and believes that people in this situation would adopt a strategy
that would maximize the prospects of the least well-off.
These are principles that rational and free persons to further their own interests would accept in an
initial position of equality as defining the fundamentals terms of their association(social contract).

These principles would then govern the assignment of rights and duties and regulate the
distribution of social and economic goods or advantages in the society.

Principle 1:
Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties
compatible with a similar system of liberty for all.

This is known as the equality principle or equal liberty principle.

Each member of society has an equal claim on their society's goods.

The principle deals with the distribution of rights and liberties in the society. Rawls identifies the
following equal basic liberties:

1) political liberty, i.e. the right to vote and hold public office
2) freedom of speech and assembly;
3) liberty of conscience and freedom of thought;
4) freedom of the person, which includes freedom from psychological oppression and
physical assault and dismemberment (integrity of the person);
5) the right to hold personal property
6) freedom from arbitrary arrest and seizure

Principle 2:
Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are both:

(a) to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged (difference principle)

4
(b) attached to offices and positions open to all under conditions of fair equality of opportunity
(equal opportunity principle)

Inequality is acceptable only if it is to the advantage of those who are worst-off, in comparison to
the previously equal distribution. It is an egalitarian idea. This is based on his notion that morally
arbitrary factors should not determine status or access to opportunities.

Offices and positions should be distributed on the basis of merit and everyone must have
reasonable opportunity to acquire the skills on the basis of which merit is assessed. This is a
precondition to the difference principle.

These two principles can be linked to the concept of affirmative action or reservation.

UNIT 2: Need for Interpretation

What is interpretation?

Salmond says that "interpretation" is "the process by which the courts try to figure out what the
legislature meant by looking at the authoritative ways it was written."
In Gray's words, it is "the process by which a judge (or any person, lawyer or not, who needs to
find out what a law means) builds from the words in a statute book a meaning that he either thinks
was intended by the Legislature or that he wants to give to it."
The difference between construction and interpretation -Construction is the process of drawing
conclusions about topics that are outside the text's intended meaning from the elements that are
provided within it. Interpretation is the process of determining the true meaning of any word or
idea that the author is attempting to convey.
This difference has been criticized and pushed to the back of the classroom. Most writers use both
words to mean the same thing.

Purpose of Interpretation.
Purpose of Interpretation: The purpose of a statute's interpretation is to help the courts figure out
what the legislators who enacted the law really meant. There is no plan to control the rule or keep

5
it within certain limits. Judges always try to follow the law while keeping in mind what the
lawmakers were trying to do. The interpretation of laws is typically motivated by two main factors:
To know the real meaning of a word.
To figure out the goal, reason, or spirit behind adding that word to the law.

When to Interpret.
It is the court's job to figure out what the law means when there is a question about it. In the form
of a law, the legislature says what it wants to do. The language used by the legislature in laws helps
the court of law figure out what the legislature really meant. The court can't just decide how to
read a law on its own. Instead, it has to follow a set of rules that have developed over time. These
ways of thinking about how to understand something are called rules of interpretation.

Need for interpretation

1. The ambiguity of the words used in the statute: Sometimes there will be words that have
more than one meaning. And it may not be clear which meaning has to be used. There
could be multiple interpretations made out of it.
2. Change in the environment: We all know that society changes from time to time and
there may be new developments happening in a society that is not taken into
consideration, this lacks the predictability of the future event.
3. Complexities of the statutes: usually statutes are complex and huge, it contains
complicated words, jargon and some technical terms which are not easy to understand
and this complexity may lead to confusion.
4. When legislation doesn’t cover a specific area: Every time when legislations are out it
doesn’t cover all the area it leaves some grey areas and interpretation helps in bridging
the gaps between.
5. Drafting error: The draft may be made without sufficient knowledge of the subject. It
may also happen due to the lack of necessary words and correct grammar. This makes
the draft unclear and creates ambiguity in the legislature.

6
 6. Incomplete rules: There are few implied rules and regulations and some implied powers
and privileges which are not mentioned in the statute and when these are not defined
properly in the statute this leads to ambiguity.

Speluncean Explorers
The four defendants are Speluncean Society members, amateur cave explorers. In early May 4299,
they entered a Central Plateau limestone tunnel with Society member Roger Whetmore. A landslip
happened away from the cave entrance. Heavy stones totally blocked the cave's single entrance.
The men waited at the blocked entrance for a rescue party to clear the debris blocking their escape.
Their families informed the Society Secretary when Whetmore and the defendants failed to return
home. The Society's headquarters provided hints about the cave the explorers wanted to see.
Rescuers arrived quickly. Rescue was a daunting task. Repeated reinforcements of men and
machines have to be transported to the cave's distant location at significant expense. Workmen,
engineers, geologists, and others set up a massive temporary camp. Landslides often slowed the
barrier removal. One killed eleven entrance-clearing workers. Before the imprisoned men were
rescued, the Speluncean Society spent eight hundred thousand frelars, raised partly by popular
subscription and partly by legislative grant. Thirty-two days after entering the cave, the men
succeeded. Since the explorers had carried few provisions and there was no animal or vegetable
matter in the cave on which they could subsist, there was early concern that they might starve
before access could be gained.
On the twentieth day of their imprisonment, they revealed that they had brought a portable wire-
less equipment that could send and receive signals inside the cave. The rescue camp constructed a
comparable equipment and spoke to the mountainside victims. They requested the release
timeframe. Even if no more landslides occurred, the project engineers said ten days would be
needed. The explorers asked if any doctors were present and were connected to a medical
committee. The imprisoned guys detailed their condition and the rations they had taken with them
and asked a doctor if they could survive without food for ten days. The medical committee
chairman said this was unlikely. The subterranean wifi machine was silent for eight hours. After
reconnecting, the men requested to talk with the doctors again. Whetmore, speaking for himself
and the accused, asked the physician's committee chairman if they could survive for 10 days if

7
they ate one of their own. The doctors' chairman hesitantly answered yes. Whetmore suggested
drawing lots to decide who to eat. None of the doctors would answer. Whetmore then questioned
if a court or government official was present to answer this issue. No rescue camp member would
advise on this topic. No clergyman or priest answered their inquiry when he asked. so. The
explorers' wireless machine's batteries were thought to be dead after no more messages came from
the cave.
Whetmore was slain and devoured by his colleagues on the twenty-third day after they entered the
cave, according to the released prisoners. According to the defendants' testimony, which the jury
accepted, Whetmore suggested they may discover the nutrient they needed in one of their own.
Whetmore reportedly suggested the defendants use a pair of dice he had with him to cast lots. After
the wireless discussions above, the defendants consented to Whetmore's scheme. After lengthy
discussion of the mathematical challenges, a dice technique was agreed upon. Before the dice were
tossed, Whetmore withdrew from the arrangement, deciding to wait a week before accepting such
a rightful and loathsome expedient. He was accused of betrayal and diced. Whetmore's turn was
cast by one of the defendants, and he was invited to object to the throw's fairness. He denied
objections. After the toss, his comrades killed and ate him. The defendants were indicted for
murdering Roger Whetmore after being rescued and treated for starvation and stress in a hospital.

Gulf Goans Hotels Co. V. Union of India(2014)

Goa coastal houses were facing demolition due to pre-1991 national government guidelines before
the Coastal Regulation Zone declaration. The CRZ prohibited construction within 500 metres of
the high tide line. Goa Bombay High Court ordered destruction.
Gulf Goans Hotels appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the CRZ warning did not apply
because the building licences prohibited construction 90m from the high tide line. They claimed
the laws and regulations cited against them were not in effect when the hotels/resorts were created.

The Supreme Court agreed with the petitioners that "law must possess a certain form; contain a
clear mandate/explicit command which may be prescriptive, permissive or penal and the law must
also seek to achieve a clearly identifiable purpose." The presentation of a clear mandate and aim

8
is essential, but the form itself or lack thereof will not be determinative. It further held that under
Article 77 of the Constitution, a law that is not authenticated and promulgated is not binding.

Ms. Githa Hariharan and Anr. V. Reserve Bank of India and Anr.(1999)

Natural guardians of a Hindu minor–

The natural guardians of a Hindu minor, in respect of the minor's person and property, are: (a) in
the case of a boy or an unmarried girl, the father, and after him, the mother: provided that the
custody of a minor who has not completed the age of five years shall ordinarily be with the mother;
The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,1956 is intended to protect the child's welfare, and as
such, the interpretation should be in favor of the mother.
It is now settled law that a narrow pedantic interpretation running counter to the constitutional
mandate should always be avoided unless it violently departs from the Legislative intent, in which
case a wider debate may be had taking contextual facts into account.
Law courts should always try to keep legislation in the statute book rather than scrapping it, unless
it violates constitutional sanctions.
The word "guardian" in the definition section means and implies both parents, so section 6(a)
should have the same meaning. The mother's right to act as guardian does not expire during the
father's lifetime, and to read the statute otherwise would be a violent departure from the legislative
intent.
Section 6(a) recognises that both the father and the mother should be recognised as natural
guardians, therefore "after" must be read and interpreted to avoid defeating the legislature's aim.
Further, gender equality is one of our Constitution's fundamental principles, and if the word "after"
is read to mean a mother cannot act as a guardian during the father's lifetime, it would violate the
constitutional mandate and create a gender divide.

9
 UNIT 3: Process of Interpretation

Basic Principles:

i) Intention of Legislature:
The legislature passes a specific law. Legislative "intent" The legislature expects the courts to
interpret and apply its laws in a way that advances the statute's goal.
The first construction criterion is that the Legislature's language must express its intent. What was
said matters, not what was intended. Reason and spirit unlock every law. The basic objective of
the Act should be applied to each word, phrase, or sentence. Interpretation depends on text and
context. Text is texture, context colour. Both matter. The instrument and its dominating purposes
are used to form a phrase or expression. The legislative function cannot be seized under the
pretence of interpretation, and predetermined meanings of provisions based on ideological
framework or scheme should be avoided. Caution is essential.
The optimal interpretation matches the statute's purpose with the terms. The Act's scope, object,
phrasing, and context must all be considered for a proper construction.
It's interpretation, not interpolation. The norms of interpretation are guides, not laws, thus useless
ones can be discarded and replaced with new ones. They are construction aids, presumptions, or
pointing devices.
Plain language has caused much discussion. Our laws cannot be simplified to baby speak for mass
consumption and precision. A good draught expresses intent clearly, avoids passive voice and
aspirational remarks, and employs consistent vocabulary. The draught or judicial interpretation
defines terminology. Short sentences. Prefer simple, everyday terms. Avoid convoluted sub-
division and repetition.

ii) Ex Visceribus Actus ((Statute must be Read as a Whole)

A legal provision can’t be interpreted in isolation. It must be read in its context. The context may
include the statute itself, legislative history, other statutes on the same subject matter, the general
scope of the statute and the mischief it is to remedy.
The statute must be read as a whole. The meaning of the words may be determined by words used
in the other parts of the section or other sections of the statute.

10
To what extent each part influences another part would be different in each case, but they may be
interdependent in a way that each portion throws light on the rest.
Interpretation in this way ensures consistency of the whole statute or series of statutes on the
subject matter.

Padma Sundara Rao v. State of Tamil Nadu

Can the State Government issue another Section 6 Notification after quashing one?
Learned counsel for the appellant argued that a bare reading of Section 6 of the Act as amended
by Act 68 of 1984 leaves no doubt that the declaration under Section 6 must be issued within the
specified time and that merely because the Court has quashed the concerned declaration does not
warrant an extension. State attorneys contended that time extensions are allowed.
Explanation 1 excludes court-stayed action/proceeding. Based on this, the court concluded that the
legislature may have clearly provided for a new start when the notification is quashed. Since only
injunction orders are covered, no other period is excluded.

Ut Res Magis Valeat Qauam Pereat (It may rather become operative than null)

A statute is to be construed to make it effective and workable. Courts should avoid construction
which makes statutes useless.
If there is a choice between two interpretations, the court should adopt the bolder construction
which would bring about an operative outcome, based on the principle that the Parliament would
legislate to achieve an effective result.
Unless the words used are absolutely senseless and impossible to implement , the statute should
not be declared void for vagueness or ambiguity.

Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse(2014)

Petitioner was married and denied relations with the respondent. It was established that he
intentionally suppressed the fact of his earlier marriage. The petitioner and respondent married
each other according to valid rites and ceremonies.

11
Whether second wife can claim maintenance under S. 125 of Cr.P.C.?
Court used purposive construction to advance social justice for the smooth working of the system,
rather than putting a roadblock in the way, since the law aims to make a fair provision against
destitution.

Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab(1955)

Section 39 of Electricity Act, 1910 mandated punishment under Indian Penal Code Section 379.
Section 50 of this Act stipulated that only the government or an aggrieved individual might initiate
prosecution.
The respondent sued the appellant under IPC Section 379 after he was convicted of electricity theft
under Section 39. The appellant argued that Section 39 could not condemn him because Section
50's conviction procedure was not followed. The Respondent argued that Section 379 IPC penalty
must follow Section 39.
Applying this logic, the Supreme Court ruled that Section 50 must have been obeyed because the
violation was against the Electricity Act, not the IPC. If the Supreme Court had ruled otherwise,
the accused convicted under Section 39 of Electricity Act would have been punished under Section
379 of IPC without following Section 50's procedure for conviction, rendering Section 50
ineffective, inoperative, and pointless.

12
 UNIT 4, 5, 6 & 7: Rules of Statutory Interpretation

LITERAL RULE

The words of a statute are first understood in their natural or ordinary sense. Phrases and sentences
are constructed according to their grammatical meaning, unless that leads to some absurdity, or
unless there is something in the statute or context to suggest the contrary.
Legislature speaks through the text and as long as it is speaking clearly, there is limited room for
the court to go beyond the text. Thus, if the text of the provision is unambiguous, the legislative
intent is epitomized therefrom.
The literal meaning cannot be departed from by the judges in light of their own views on policy.
Words are to be understood in the popular sense, unless they have some special meaning in trade
or business, or in law.
The exact meaning is preferred to the loose meaning (e.g. meaning of contiguous).

Tej Kiran v. N. Sanjiva Reddy

Jagaduru Shankaracharya of Goverdan Peeth, Puri is the appellants' idol. Patna hosted a World
Hindu Religious Conference in March 1969. The Shankaracharya participated and is believed to
have said that untouchability was in harmony with Hinduism and that no law could stop it, then
left when the National Anthem was performed. Shri Narendra Kumar Salve, MP (Betul), presented
a Lok Sabha Calling Attention Motion on April 2, 1969. The Shankaracharya was vilified during
the conversation. “Gave themselves up to the use of language which was more commonplace than
serious, more lax than dignified, more unparliamentary than sober and jokes and puns were
bandied around,” the appellants said.
Article 105 of the Indian Constitution's interpretation was the problem. The appellants claimed
that the second paragraph of the one hundred and fifth article offered protection only to matters
important to Parliament. The Court disagreed.
Art. 105(2)—No member of Parliament shall be liable to any proceedings in any court for anything
said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any committee thereof, and no person shall be so

13
liable for the publication by or under the authority of either House of Parliament of any report,
paper, votes, or proceedings.
The provision protects "anything said......in Parliament." The word "anything" means everything.
The words "in Parliament" limit it to Parliament's sitting and business. Once Parliament was sitting
and doing its business, anything stated during that business was protected from court proceedings.
Parliamentarians must be free to speak without fear of legal repercussions. The Speaker,
Parliament's rules, and members' good sense govern what they say. Courts are powerless. Appeal
denied.

B.N. Mutto v. T.K. Nandi

The respondent (T.K. Nandi) leased B.N. Mutto's residence while he lived in government quarters.
Later, the government ordered government employees with local homes to leave federal housing.
He retired before the government ordered him to leave.
He wondered if he might use Sec. 14A and 25b(5) of the Delhi Rent Control Act. Section 14
prohibits courts from transferring possession. Exception: Section 14(1)(e). The landlord can
transfer if they need to live there. Section 14A allowed certain people to reclaim premises
immediately.
Where a landlord who is a person in occupation of any residential premises allotted to him by the
Central Government or any local authority is required, by, or in pursuance of, any general or
special order made by that Government or authority, to vacate such residential accommodation, or
in default, to incur certain obligations, on the ground that he owns, in the Union territory of Delhi,
a residential accommodation either in his own name or in the name of his wife,
The Apex Court noted that Section 14A grants some parties the ability to recover immediate
possession of premises if certain circumstances are met. The clause does not require government
employees to occupy central government-allocated premises. The court permitted the appeal with
costs since the landlord who retired before the Government's notice to quit is likewise entitled to
section 14A benefits.

14
GOLDEN RULE

It is a modification of the principle of literal interpretation.

The court must find out the intention of the legislature from the words used in the statute by giving
them their natural meaning, but if it leads to absurdity, inconvenience, hardship or injustice, the
Court must modify the meaning to such an extent that would prevent such an occurrence.
There is a presumption that the legislature does not intend certain objects and any construction
leading to such objects deserves to be rejected.
This rule is seen as solving all problems and is, therefore, known as the golden rule.
Discussion on Lee v. Knapp & State of Punjab v. Qaiser Jahan Begum

G. Narayanaswami v. G. Pannerselvam (1972)

A learned Judge of the Madras High Court overturned the appellant's April 11, 1970 election to
the Madras Legislative Council from the Madras District Graduates' Constituency since he barely
passed the High School Leaving Examination.
Art. 171(3) (b) as nearly as may be, one-twelfth shall be elected by electorates consisting of persons
residing in the State who have been for at least three years graduates of any university in the
territory of India or have been for at least three years in possession of qualifications prescribed by

15
or under any law made by Parliament as equivalent to that of a graduate of any such university;
There is no definition of "electorate," but Section 2(1)(a) of the
The Court noted that the term "electorate" means a body of electors, not necessarily a body that
elects representatives "from amongst themselves". Thus, the term "electorate" in Article 171(3) of
our Constitution does not limit electorate choice by requiring that the person chosen be a member
of the electorate. Each House (Legislative Assembly and Council) has its own qualifications for
electors and representatives.
The Court noted that a member of a Legislative Assembly must be an Elector in the Constituency
from which he or she stands, but a member of a State's Legislative Council is not. Section 6 of the
Representation of People Act, 1951, states that a Legislative Council member must be "an elector
for any Assembly constituency" in the State to which he was elected.
The court also examined Art. 173: “A person shall not be qualified to be chosen to fill a seat in the
Legislature of a State unless he -
(a) is a citizen of India, and makes and subscribes before some person authorised in that behalf by
the Election Commission an oath or affirmation according to the form set out for the purpose in
the Third Schedule;
(b) is, in the case of a seat in the Legislative Assembly, not less than twenty-five years of age and,
in the case of a
(c) meets any additional requirements set by Parliament.”
The High Court presuming legislative purpose added to the terms specifically laid down. The
Constitution discusses elector and elected qualifications, therefore the legislature has no
supervision. Electors are capable of choosing their representatives. No absurdity here. The High
Court has legislated. The Legislature fixes legislation flaws.
The appeal was granted and the High Court order overturned.

D. Saibaba v. Bar Council of India & Anr.(2003)

The Bar Council of India (BCI) ordered the State Bar Council to remove the appellant from the
roster of advocates on 31.03.2001 after he failed to relinquish an STD booth. The appellant gave
up the booth and requested a BCI review on 26.04.2001. Time-barred, the BCI denied the review

16
petition on 26.08.2001. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court under S.38 of the Advocates
Act, 1961 and by special permission.
BCI argued that S. 48AA, which denied the review, reads that “The Bar Council of India or any
of its committees, other than its disciplinary committee, may of its own motion or otherwise review
any order, within sixty days of the date of that order, passed by it under this Act.” The text of S.
38 and 48AA suggests legislative intent to limit review. The appellant also challenged S. 48AA as
impracticable in an original petition.
The court emphasised that an aggrieved person cannot use right of review without order. It
supported an interpretation that implemented the rule and made review realistic and effective. The
BCI can still review orders after 60 days. From G.P. Singh's Principles of Statutory Interpretation,
"It seems strange that an obvious meaning regulation needs explanation. After construing the
terms, the rule that plain words need no construction is based on the premise that they are plain.
Context and construal are needed to determine whether words are straightforward or ambiguous.
This case was a mountain out of a molehill, the Court said. It upheld the appeals and reinstated the
appellant as an advocate.

The Court dismissed S. 48AA's constitutionality challenge on the norm of ut res magis valeat quam
pereat because the court made it workable and fixed its intrinsic weakness.

MISCHIEF RULE

This rule of interpretation originated in Heydon’s case so it is also known as Heydon’s rule. It is
to be applied when there is ambiguity in the statute, such that the words are capable of two or more
constructions.
According to this rule, 4 things are to be considered:
a) What was the law before making of the statute
b) What was the mischief/defect for which the law did not provide
c) What remedy the Parliament employed in the statute
d) What is the reason for providing the remedy
The rule then directs that courts must adopt the construction that suppresses the mischief and
advances the remedy.

17
This has also come to be known as purposive construction, through which the courts seek to give
effect to the true purpose of the legislation and look at extraneous material that has a bearing on
the background against which the legislation was enacted.

Smith v. Hughes(1960)

Case involves 6 Magistrate fine appeals. Prostitutes solicited on the street.

Each defendant was in a nearby house. In one example, the defendant tapped and called out to
street guys from a balcony. In another case, the defendants were in a first-floor window.
Each defendant was accused of soliciting in a public place under the Street Offences Act, 1959.
Section 1(1) of the Act states: “It shall be an offence for a common prostitute to loiter or solicit in
a street or public place for the purpose of prostitution.”
It does not require street solicitation. It also doesn't indicate it's enough if the solicited individual
is in the street.
The court found that this Act was meant to clean up the streets and prevent prostitutes from
harassing citizens. In this context, it does not matter whether the prostitute is soliciting in the street,
in a doorway, on a balcony, at a window, or whether the window is shut, open, or half open, since
her solicitation is projected to and addressed to someone walking in the street.
The Court confirmed the Magistrate's findings and dismissed the appeals on this basis.

Advantages:

● Law commission finds mischief rule more efficient as it opposed to Literal and Golden
rule.
● It avoids unjust and absurd results in sentencing.

Disadvantages:

● It is considered as an outdated rule as it came into the picture in the 16th century.
● Gives excess power to the judiciary who are unelected and it is considered
undemocratic.
● This makes the law uncertain.

18
 ● In the 16th century, the kings used to give the judiciary complete power to draft laws
so at that time they were well qualified about the mischief acts.

Purposive Construction

It is the modern version of mischief rule. It is actually more flexible compared to literal rule and
golden rule which tends to concentrate more on the meaning of individual words or phrases. This
looks for the purpose of the law. This rule allows judges to add or ignore any of the words in the
statute while interpreting in order to protect the purpose of creating that law and give fair and equal
justice to everyone.

This rule is always compared with the mischief rule. As mischief rule looks into the gap between
the old and new law and how parliament came up with the new law and what are the new remedies
brought out to resolve the problems which were exiting before, whereas the purposive construction
rule is broader where it not only figure out the gap between the old and new laws but it also helps
judges to make an attempt to identify what parliament meant to achieve.

Important features:

1. Here judges do not go by the letter of the law, but they look into the intention and the
spirit of the statute.
2. Legislative intention is a fictitious concept.
3. The legislative intention with respect to a particular statute can be an intention of the
majority of the parliamentarians.
4. In mischief rule, the court resorts to a particular act intended to remedy but purposive
construction looks into the overall intention of the parliament on the statute. In this way,
purposive construction is wider than the mischief rule.

19
RULE OF HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION

Statute is to be read as a whole and one provision must be read with another(ex visceribus actus)
to avoid inconsistency or repugnancy.
It is the duty of the courts to avoid a clash between two sections and to construe the provisions
which appear to conflict so that they harmonise.
It should not be assumed that Parliament had given with one hand what it took away with another.
One provision should not be used to defeat another unless they are impossible to reconcile. As far
as possible, effect should be given to both.
An approach that can be used is to construe the more general one to exclude the more specific
one(generalibus specalia derogant) e.g. banking in List 1 excludes agricultural indebtedness in List
III.

K.M. Nanavati v. State of Bombay

In exercise of powers under Article 161 of the Constitution, Governor of Bombay passed an order
suspending the sentence passed by the High Court during the pendency of appeal to the Supreme
Court
Petitioner contended Order 21, Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules(person convicted can’t be
allowed to appeal unless he surrenders to the sentence) would not apply in view of Governor’s
order
Petitioner’s lawyer contended that Governor’s powers are unfettered sovereign powers and does
not conflict with the Supreme Court’s powers under Article 142 and 145 as they are judicial
powers.
The Supreme Court ruled that both powers operate in the same field and that the ambit of Article
161(any time) is much wider than Article 142(only when matter is pending). Thus an order of the
Governor can operate only until the matter became sub-judice. Then it is for the court to decide
whether to grant bail or otherwise. Thus prayer to hear SLP without surrendering fails.

20
Speedline Agencies v. T. Stanes and Co. Ltd.

Stanes Tea and Coffee Ltd., the landlord of Coimbatore premises leased to appellant, obtained an
order of eviction on the grounds of bonafide exigency under S. 10(3)(a)(i) and (iii) of the Tamil
Nadu Buildings(Lease and Rent Control) Act,1960.
Appellant claimed that merger disqualified the new business from claiming eviction benefits.
According to Ss. 391 and 394 of the Companies Act, 1956, the amalgamated company has a
different legal entity from the transferor.
Respondent said merger does not relinquish rights. They claim that the entire corporation,
including the leasehold property, is transferred.
The court found it unjust and irrational for a corporation merging with another to not use its
property. Rent control and the Companies Act appear to conflict here. Both laws must be read
harmoniously to avoid destroying a right under one.
Appellant was directed to give respondent corporation possession.

The Remington Rand of India v. The Workmen(1968)

Section 17(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, an award by the tribunal had to be published “within
a period of thirty days from the date of its receipt by the appropriate Government”. The award was
published beyond the 30 day period so the petitioners argued that it was not enforceable. Court
held that the time limit was directory, not mandatory, the condition being that publication of the
award should not be inordinately delayed.
Reference was made to Sirsilk v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, where parties had settled after
passing of the award by the tribunal. There was a conflict between S. 18(1) of the Industrial
Disputes Act, which says a settlement is binding and S.18(3) which says that an award is binding.
Solution was to interpret S.17 in a way that ordinarily the government would have to publish the
award, except in special circumstances such as these.

21
 UNIT 8 & 9: Maxims of Statutory Interpretation

Ejusdem Generis
There are certain general principles of interpretation that have been applied by the courts from
time to time and one of them is the construction ejusdem generis.

Literal meaning- Ejusdem generis is a Latin phrase that means ‘of the same kind’. It is used to
interpret legislation that is written in a haphazard manner. When a law mentions certain
classifications of people or things before referring to them in general, the general assertions only
apply to the same people or things who are expressly named. For example, if legislation mentions
automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles, and other motor-powered vehicles, the term ‘vehicles’
does not include aircraft since the list is limited to land-based transportation.

Interpretation of ejusdem generis- The Latin word ejusdem generis means "of the same kind."
If two or more terms are similar (for example, they belong to the same class), any generic words
that follow them should only be used to discuss that class. Unless the context indicates otherwise,
generic terms should be considered at face value, just like any other word. However, if a broad
phrase is followed by specific words from a different category, the broad term may be given a
restricted meaning from the same group. Because the legislature demonstrated its intent by
employing specific terms from a different genus, the general statement derives its meaning from
the specific statements that preceded it. The ejusdem generis criterion is not always applicable. If
the law prohibits the use of this norm, it has nothing to do with how broad language are interpreted.
The concept of ejusdem generis is founded on the assumption that if the government wanted broad
words to be used in a variety of ways, it would not have picked specific words.

This rule applies when-

i) There is an enumeration of specific words

ii) Words enumerated constitute a class or category

iii) Class/category is not exhausted by enumeration

22
iv) General terms follow the enumeration

v) There is no indication of a different legislative intent

Cases

Tillmans and Co. v. SS Knutsford Ltd.

The bill of lading contained the clause “in consequence of war, disturbance or any other cause”-It
should be interpreted to be causes of the same kind.

CIT v. SMIFS Securities Ltd.

Section 32 of Income Tax Act, 1961 defines intangible assets being “know-how, patents,
copyrights, trademarks, licenses, franchises, or any other business or commercial rights of similar
nature”- The question raised was whether goodwill is a business or commercial right? It was held
that goodwill held to fall within the definition.

Animal Welfare Board of India v. A Nagaraja

Section 11(1)(a) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 states that if any person beats,
kicks, overrides, overdrives, overloads , tortures or otherwise treats any animal so as to subject it
to unnecessary pain or suffering, he commits an offence- “or otherwise” are not words of limitation
and jalikattu, bullock cart races etc. were held to fall under ambit of this provision. However
Ejusdem Generis is not applied in this case, as Jallikattu is for entertainment purposes. But it is an
offence under Section 11 (1)(a). .

National Association of Local Govt. Officers v. Bolton Corp.

Definition of workmen under Industrial Courts Act, 1919 “ means any person who entered into
work under a contract with an employer whether the contract be by way of manual labour, clerical
work or otherwise- The principle of ejusdem generis not applicable as words are not from the same
genus, but heterogeneous items

However rule is not inviolable, it must be applied in light of the context and object of the enactment

23
to give effect to the intention of the Legislature

Culley v. Harrison

S. 1 of Sunday Observance Act, 1780 reads- “any house, room or other place which shall be opened
or used for public entertainment on any part of Lord's Day- shall be deemed a disorderly house”-
The word ‘place’ is of wider importance than house and room.

If the rule was applied that place only covers private places and not public places also the purpose
of the law is defeated which is to create peace and harmony.

If the application of Ejusdem Generis defeats the purpose of the law itself then this rule will not
apply.

Legislative rule is the most superior and needs to be kept in mind while applying the rules of
interpretation.

Noscitur a Sociis

Noscitur a sociis is a Latin term which means associated words, the meaning of unclear words or
phrases is to be determined or interpreted on the basis of its context and the words and phrases
surrounding it. Associated words try to explain the meaning of the general words and also limit
the interpretation of specific or special terms. When a word used in a statute is ambiguous or vague,
the meaning of such words will be determined by looking at associated words around it. These
surrounding associated words will give clear and specific meaning to it. The importance of this
rule is it aims to interpret by reading the whole statute. It doesn’t emphasize one particular word
but it tends to interpret the word by looking into its preceding and succeeding words. The words
are understood in a cognitive sense and the intention of the legislatures can be easily understood.

Cases

Commrs of Customs and Excise v. Savoy Hotel)

As per Purchase Tax Act- “manufactured beverages includes fruit juices and bottled waters and
syrups etc.” - the question raised was whether fresh pressed unsweetened orange juice? The court
held that fresh pressed unsweetened orange juice are not manufactured beverages.

24
D.P.P. v. Jordan

According to Section 4(1) of Obscene Publication Act, 1959 -”publication of the article in question
is justified as being for the public good on the ground that it is in the interest of science, literature,
art or learning or of other objects of general concern”- does it have psychosexual value to relieve
sexual tension? It was held that the subject matter is not related to science, literature, art, learning
or other objects, hence it could take the exception of Section 4.

Pradeep Agarbatti, Ludhiana v. State of Punjab

Schedule A to Punjab General Sales Tax Act,1948- “cosmetics, perfumery, and toilet goods,
excluding toothpaste, tooth powder, kumkum and soap” : does Perfumery=dhoop and aggarbatti
come under this? Dhoop and Aggarbatti does not come under toilet good.

Expresso unius est exclusio alterius

It is a Latin phrase that says ‘Express Mention and Implied Exclusion’ that means express mention
of one thing excludes all other things.

It is a product of logic and common sense. It is to be applied only when in the natural association
of ideas, the contrast between what is provided and what is left out leads to an inference that the
latter was intended to be excluded.

In other words, if a statute/provision enumerates the things to which it applies, everything else
must be excluded from its operation and effect.

For example, if a statute lists the issues over which it has jurisdiction, no further issues can be
added. Or, where a statute directly prohibits certain actions, only those explicitly mentioned are
prohibited. Similarly, if a statute requires that particular acts be performed in a specific way or by
a specific person, their performance in any other way or by any other person is impliedly banned.

The rule is neither conclusive nor common. It should be used with caution. It should only be used
to determine legislative intent where it is doubtful, not to oppose the legislature's apparent
objective. It is only to be used when it is clearly evident that the thing excluded cannot reasonably
be expected to coexist with what is specifically indicated.

25
Nandini Satpathi v. P.L. Dani

Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act-No confession made by any person whilst he is in the
custody of a police-officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be
proved as against such person.

This is not applicable to any other statement.

Generalia Specialibus non derogant

General terms do not override particular provisions, nor do special provisions override general
provisions.
Where the legislature has dedicated attention to and made provision for a separate subject, the
presumption is that a future general statute will not interfere with it, unless it expresses that desire
very clearly.
The situation is simplified if the special Act comes after a general Act. It is assumed that the
legislature intended the special law to be an exception to its own general Act.

Amarendra Pratap Singh v. Tej Bahadur Prajapati

The Orissa Scheduled Areas Transfer of Immovable Property (By Scheduled Tribes) Regulations,
1956 -Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force any transfer of
immovable property situated within a Scheduled Area by a member of a Scheduled Tribe shall be
absolutely null and void and of no force or effect whatsoever unless made in favour of another
member of a Scheduled Tribe or with the previous consent in writing of the competent authority

This law is an exception to the doctrine of adverse possession.

Reddendo singular singulis

The phrase means ‘rendering each his own’ or ‘referring each to each’.
Following a list of particular things, where there are general words of description, such general
words are to be construed distributively, and if the general words apply to some things but not to

26
others, the general words are to apply to those things to which they are applicable and not to those
to which they are not applicable.

Each word or phrase is to be applied only to the appropriate objects.

For Example:

“If any one shall draw or load any sword or gun”- the word draw is applied to sword and load to
gun, because it is impossible to load a sword or draw a gun.

“firemen, policemen, and doctors in a hospital. Here, “in a hospital” only applies to doctors and
not to firemen or policemen.

E.g. Proviso to Article 304 of the Constitution of India- “Provided that no Bill or amendment for
the purpose of clause(b) shall be introduced or moved in the Legislature of a State without the
previous sanction of the President.

Bishop v. Deakin

Section 59(1) of the Local Government Act, 1963 reads: A person shall be disqualified for being
elected or being a member of a local authority if he has within five years before the day of election
or since his election been convicted of any offence and ordered to be imprisoned for a period of
not less than three months without the option of fine.

Issue: Is a conviction prior to election a disqualification for continuing to be a member if the lection
was not challenged by an election petition within the period of limitation?

Held: Member not required to vacate the seat.

By applying this rule in this case the purpose of the law will be defeated. Hence this rule is not
applicable.

Union of India v. Alok Kumar(2010)

Rule 9 of the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules of 1962 describes how harsh
punishments are given. Whenever the disciplinary authority thinks there are reasons to look into a

27
claim of misconduct or bad behavior against a railway employee, it can do so itself or appoint,
under this rule or the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act of 1850, a Board of Inquiry or other authority
to do so.

The defendants told the court that the phrase "other authority" should be taken to mean that it only
applies to people who work for the railways and that a retired railway officer or official should not
be appointed as an inquiry officer. They said that the way it was written implied exclusion, and
exclusion is a strict rule. That is, the people who made these rules say that past employees of the
Railway Department can't be hired as a "other authority" (an "inquiry officer") under these rules.
They also said that the phrase "other authority" should be read the same way as the first part of
Rule 9 (2), and that the first part of the Rule should be used as a guide.

The Court said that an exclusion clause should be written in clear, unambiguous, plain, and specific
language, just like how the clauses that take away the court's power use specific language. In some
cases, this kind of exclusion could be seen as a reference to implied exclusion that can't be stopped.
We think that the language of Rule 9(2) doesn't back up what the interviewees said. Without
specific language, it's hard to figure out how the idea of exclusion is being used. Rule 9(2) is
written in a way that makes it clear that the words can be read in different ways. Because of this,
the ejusdem generis rule would not apply to this case.

Ashbury Railway Carriage & Iron Co. v. Riche(1875)

Under the Companies Act of 1862, a business called "The Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron
Company" was formed. The object clause of the memorandum of association said that the
company's goals were: 1. to make, sell, or rent out railway carriages and waggons, 2. and all kinds
of railway plant, fittings, machinery, and rolling-stock; 3. to run a business as mechanical
engineers and general contractors; 4. to buy, lease, work, and sell mines, minerals, land, and
buildings; 5. to buy and sell, as merchants, timber, coal, metals, or other materials; 6. and also to
buy

The board of directors decided to sign a deal to build a railway line in Belgium. Hector Riche and
The Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Company were the ones who signed the deal. The deal
called for the delivery of the materials needed to build railway lines. The object clause of this
28
company said that its goal was to sell and give the materials needed to build railways. It doesn't
cover building train tracks. In this case, the deal was to build a railway. That went against what
was written in the agreement.

So the company didn't have any choice but to sign the deal. This contract was deemed ultra vires
by the House of Lords. This is an example of the saying "what one says excludes what another
says."

UNIT 10 & 11: Presumptions in Statutory Interpretation

1. In favor of the constitutionality of enactment

If there are two possible interpretations, one that would be inconsistent with the Constitution, while
the other would make the statute conform to the Constitution, the courts should lean in favour of
the latter.
In other words, construction that leads to unconstitutionality of statute must be avoided.
Courts must presume that legislature understands the needs of its own people and the law is
directed to problems manifested by experience and is based on adequate grounds.
Burden of proof is on person challenging the constitutional validity of the law to show that there
is a transgression.
Presumption is true for all kinds of legislation: the Parliament/State Legislature did not intend to
enact anything beyond its limits of competence.
However, once an invasion of fundamental rights is established, it is for the State to show that law
is saved under the reasonable restrictions mentioned.
The presumption doesn’t mean that an unnatural or forced meaning must be given, or a policy
must be found which is not there in the statute
The presumption is given effect to by limiting the meaning of certain words and expressions or
widening the scope of the terms.
Where the statute is invalid in parts, but valid in others and the valid parts are complete without
the invalid parts, the doctrine of severability may be applied
In essence, the idea is that the will of the people is represented in a statute and shouldn’t be lightly

29
interfered with. Its unconstitutionality must be plainly established before the law can be declared
void.
Courts must defer to the nature and importance of the legislative process.

Sagar Ahmed v. State of UP (1954)

2. Presumption of conformity with international law

Art. 73 of Constitution-Power of the President to enter into international agreement or convention

Art. 253- Legislation for giving effect to international agreements

Art. 51(c)- Directive Principle of State Policy to respect international law and treaty obligations

If the terms of the legislation are not clear and are capable of more than one meaning, treaty
becomes relevant and the meaning that is in consonance with the treaty is preferred

Jolly George Verghese v. The Bank of Cochin(1980) -Article 11 of ICCPR: Right to not be
imprisoned merely on the ground of inability to fulfill a contractual obligation

30
The presumption is especially relevant when there is no inconsistency between the statute and an
international convention and there is a void in the domestic law

Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan-Art. 11 of CEDAW: Elimination of discrimination in field of

employment

UNIT 12 & 13: Internal Aids

1. Long Title

Part of Act and acts as aid for construction

Guide to object, scope or purpose of the Act(either taken along with Preamble and even in its
absence)

Distinguished from short title(an abbreviation for reference only), which is not a useful aid to
construction

ENACTMENT IS AMBIGUOUS BUT LAW IS CLEAR

Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v UOI-

Majority judgment held that Article 19(6) permitted the State to impose reasonable restrictions on

31
the right to carry on an occupation, trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) and that the 25% EWS
reservation obligation on private unaided schools was a reasonable restriction. Words “free” and
“compulsory” in Long Title of the Act relied on to hold that Act was intended to give effect to
rights under Art. 21 and 21 A.

2. Preamble

Part of the Act and is an aid to interpret the provisions of enactment

Expresses the scope, object and purpose of the Act more clearly than the long title

Often expresses the ground and cause of making the Act and the evils sought to be remedied

It is the key to the mind of the Legislature: helps to ascertain the true intention of the Legislature

Can be read along with other portions of the Act to find out the meaning of the words, if
ambiguous(read as a whole)

However, where the language is clear, the Preamble must be disregarded

Maharao Sahab Shri Bhim Singhji v. UOI-

Section 23(1) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act: Any land for any purpose taken to
mean a public purpose for common good since Preamble shows that the objective of the law was
to prevent concentration of urban land in the hands of a few and to ensure equitable distribution

The Preamble of Constitution defines the essential features and basic objectives of the
Constitution- relied on by Keshavananda and Minerva Mills to hold power of amendment under
Art. 368 is limited

3. Headings
Prefixed to sections or groups of sections
Conflicting views on weight attached
Can be used to interpret unless the wording of sections/s is inconsistent with such interpretation
Can’t be used to limit or cut down the application of the Section

32
May only be used in case of ambiguity
N.C. Dhondial v. UOI-
One year period prescribed in S. 36(2) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1994 took away the
jurisdiction of the Commission after expiry of period, not merely procedural provision because
heading of the section was “Matters not subject to jurisdiction of commission”

4. Marginal Notes
Can’t be used to construe the section
Included only for ease of reference, not debated or open for consideration in Parliament
Only permitted to be used in exceptional cases, constitute part of the Constitution and used to
interpret in Prem Parkash Pahwa v. United Commercial Bank

5. Punctuations
Early English law had no punctuation, so courts did not consider
In the modern day it is doubtful- suit for specific moveable property lost or acquired by theft, or
dishonest misappropriation or conversion, or for compensation for wrongfully taking or detaining
the property(Art. 48 of Indian Limitation Act, 1908)-rejected only dishonest conversion covered
Not mere stocking but stocking for sale is punishable in Mohd. Shabbir v. State of Maharashtra
under S. 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 : Whoever, himself or by any other person on
his behalf, manufactures for sale or for distribution, or sells, or stocks(no comma) or exhibits or
offers for sale or distributes

6. Illustrations
Are of relevance and value in construing the text of the section
Can’t however curtail or expand the ambit of the section

Mohd. Sayedol Ariffin v. Yeah Oai Gark-

Whether diary maintained by a deceased father containing the date of births,deaths and marriages
in his family is admissible as proof of age of his son under Section 32(5) of Straits Settlement
Ordinance,1893?

33
Illustration b) of the Act runs: What is the date of birth of A? A letter from A’s deceased father
announcing the birth of A on a given date is a relevant fact.
Well known rule in law of evidence from illustration(b) to Section 114: Court may presume that
an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated in material particulars.

7. Definitions
To prevent repetition
May specifically incorporate from another statute
State of Kerala v. Mathai Vergese
Inclusive v. exhaustive definition
Definitions must be understood in context
Vanguard Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd., Madras v. Fraser and Ross

8. Proviso
Excepts something out of enactment or qualifies something that would be within the purview of
the enactment if it weren’t for the proviso
The proviso can’t exclude or add something by implication
Madras and Southern Maharatta Railway Co. Ltd. V. Bezwada Municipality(1944)-
Calculation of property tax on land and buildings under The Madras District Municipalities
Act,1920
S. 82(2)- shall be deemed to be the gross annual rent at which they may reasonably be expected to
let from month to month or from year to year
Proviso-any Government or railway building or any building of a class not ordinarily let,annual
value of the premises shall be deemed to be six per cent, of the total of the estimated value of the
land and the estimated present cost of erecting the building

34
6% formula for vacant land?-not only in case of things subject to proviso-rest unqualified
To be construed only in relation to section to which it is appended, does not travel beyond the
section
Purposes of a proviso- Sundaram Pillai v. Pattabiraman
Qualifying/excepting
Mandatory condition
Part of enactment
Optional addenda
Eviction for non payment of rent-proviso says willful default-explanation says default of notice
Difference between proviso and exception- Exception restricts application to particular cases,
whereas proviso removes certain special cases and provides for them specially.

9. Explanation
Helps to understand meaning of words contained in the section
Sundaram Pillai v. Pattabiraman-
Explain the meaning and intent law
Clarify obscurity or vagueness
Make object of enactment more purposeful
Can’t change the law, only fill gaps
Can’t take away any right

10. Schedule
Forms part of the statute
Added to the end to avoid making the enactment too lengthy
Usually subsidiary to main enactment

35
 UNIT 14 & 15: External Aids

1. Dictionaries
If word is not defined in the Act, it is permissible to refer to dictionaries to find out its meaning in
the general sense
E.g. Supreme Court Rules. 1966-on complaint of any person or ‘otherwise’-AORs name can be
removed from register for misconduct-otherwise meaning contrarily/different from that to which
it relates-suo motu action permissible
However, context must be taken into account e.g. transfer can mean transfer of ownership or
possession-transfer of securities to depository under Bombay Stock Exchange Rules-only
possession

2. Textbooks
Courts may take help from textbooks
Eminent authors are considered
Have persuasive value

3. Foreign Decisions
Indian cases binding and where available, reference to foreign cases unnecessary
However, they have persuasive value
Reference to English precedent made in case statute deals with common law principles
M’Naghten’s case

4. Parliamentary History
Traditional British Practice:
Intent of the Parliament is not to be gathered from the parliamentary history of the statute so Bills
in original form, amendments considered, debates, resolutions or statement of ministers during the
process are not to be admissible aids to construction
However, rule was relaxed to admit reports of commissions preceding the enactment of a statute
as evidence of surrounding circumstances/mischief which the act is intended to remedy

36
Criticism of traditional practice:
Distinction between usage of reports etc. for finding out intention of legislature v. usage to find
out evil which Act was intended to remedy is obscure or artificial

R v. Burke-
S. 1(3)(a) of the Protection from Eviction Act, 1977
If any person with intent to cause the residential occupier of any premises—(a)to give up the
occupation of the premises or any part thereof - does acts calculated to interfere with the peace or
comfort of the residential occupier or members of his household, or persistently withdraws or
withholds services reasonably required for the occupation of the premises as a residence, he shall
be guilty of an offence.
Offence=civil wrong?
Reference made to report of the Committee on Housing in greater London-disclosed variety of
offences which couldn’t be brought under crime/civil wrong
Report not used just to understand mischief but also to construe the provision

Modern trend: Limited but open use of parliamentary history should be made in construing statutes

Pepper v. Hart(1993)
Reference to Parliamentary material permitted where statute is ambiguous or obscure or literal
meaning leads to absurdity to understand legislative intention behind the obscure words or where
the material discloses mischief Act aims at. In case of statements made in Parliament-only
statement of minister or promoter of the bill.

Indian practice:
Supreme Court generally followed traditional practice, but on many occasions, it has used this aid
in constructing a statute

A.K. Gopalan’s case-Speeches by members of Constituent Assembly can’t be used as they are
indicative of subjective intent of the speaker and not mental process of the majority vote

37
S.R. Chaudhuri v. State of Punjab- Reference to Draft Constitution and Dr. Ambedkar’s views

5. Historical facts and Surrounding circumstances

Court may take into account external or historical facts necessary to understand the subject matter
of the statute or to understand the circumstances existing at the time of passing it
Statute isn’t intended to be lifeless
Must give way to clear language of the statute

6. Social, Political, Economic and Scientific Developments

Court is free to apply meaning of statute to present day conditions
Courts have to apply a statute to the world as it exists today
Reference to historical circumstances doesn’t mean that statute doesn’t apply to developments not
existing or known at the time of enactment
Dynamic interpretation is favoured when conceptual similarities are there
Examples in terms of changing social attitudes

7. Statutes in pari materia

Extension of the idea that statute must be read as a whole
Statutes that relate to the same person/ thing
Not necessarily identical- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Indian Evidence Act, 1872
where in Section 4 presumption exists that gratification other than legal remuneration accepted as
bribe-definition of ‘shall presume’ taken from Evidence Act
Common Cause v. Union of India(1996)- Representation of the People Act, 1951 and Income
Tax Act, 1961
Black money can’t be claimed as election expense

38
 UNIT 16 & 17: Subsidiary Rules of Interpretation

1. Non-Obstante Clause-
It is a Latin word meaning "Notwithstanding". The notwithstanding clause in a statute makes the
provision independent of other provisions contained in the law, even if the other provisions provide
the contrary. A non-obstante clause is usually used in a provision to indicate that the provision
should prevail despite anything to the contrary in the provision mentioned in such a non-obstante
clause. In case there is any inconsistency or a departure between the non-obstante clause and
another provision, one of the objects of such a clause is to indicate that it is the non-obstante clause
that would prevail over the other clause.

2. Legal Fiction-
A Legal Fiction is an assumption of a state of facts that is not true but assumed to be true for legal
purposes.
A legal fiction is a fact assumed or created by courts that are then used in order to help reach a
decision or to apply a legal rule. An assumption that something occurred or someone or something
exists which, in fact, is not the case, but that is made in the law to enable a court to equitably
resolve a matter before it. In order to do justice, the law will permit or create legal fiction.

39
Limitations to the use of Legal Fiction:
Legal fiction should not be employed to defeat law or result in illegality; it has been always stressed
that legal fiction should not be employed where it would result in the violation of any legal rule or
moral injunction. Legal fiction should operate for the purpose for which it was created and should
not be extended beyond its legitimate field. Legal fiction should not be extended so as to lead to
unjust results.

3. Mandatory and Directory Provisions-

A mandatory provision must be followed or done exactly as written, but a directory provision only
needs to be followed or done mostly as written. In this the words referred are ‘shall’ and ‘may’.
The word ‘shall’ is intended to be Mandatory and the word ‘may’ is intended to be Directory.
If the words used in a statute is ‘shall’ it is a duty on the authority to do that particular thing and if
that duty is not performed, generally there will be consequences.
If the word used in statute is ‘may’ then it gives discretion upon the authority, generally there are
no consequences but if there are it would be very small.

A "mandatory" provision is one that says that certain things must be done or that something must
be done in a certain way. It is a law that leaves nothing to the Court's choice about how its words
should be followed. Mandatory law is about important things, affects important rights, and is at
the heart of what needs to be done.
A "mandatory" provision of a law is one that, if it isn't followed, makes the action that it applies
to illegal and void.

A directory provision is a law made by a legislative body that tells people what they should do but
doesn't say how they should do it. A directory statute's provisions are merely formal and have no
bearing on any real rights or the core of what needs to be done, so following them is more of a
matter of convenience than of content.
The directory provision does not have to be followed exactly for a process to be legal, but it must
be followed as closely as possible.

There is only one difference between mandatory and directory statutes, and that is how they are

40
implemented. Most of the time, this question comes up when someone's rights have been affected
by breaking the law or failing to follow it. This involves deciding whether or not the violation or
omission is serious enough to make invalid any acts or actions taken in accordance with the law,
or any rights, powers, privileges, or immunities claimed under it. If the violation or absence makes
the law unenforceable, it is a mandatory law. If it doesn't, it is a directory law.

The question of whether a law is directory or mandatory was decided in Chandrika Prasad Yadav
v. State of Bihar. The aim and goal of the law should be used to decide what the statute's
foundational principle is. If holding the same director goes against the purpose of the law, it should
be interpreted as mandatory. On the other hand, if holding the same mandatory will cause serious
general inconvenience for innocent members of the general public without furthering the purpose
of the law, it should be interpreted as directory. This doesn't mean that the language used will be
ignored, though.

Case:

Lalita Kumari v. State of UP

41
Consequences of Non-Compliance-
In the case of mandatory provisions, nullification is provided as a consequence of failure to comply
with statutory requirements. For instance, in the case of the Limitation Act, the period prescribed
for bringing a legal proceeding is mandatory, and non-compliance with the provision will lead to
the dismissal of the legal proceeding. Non-compliance with directory provisions would not furnish
any cause of action or ground of challenge

4. Conjunctive and disjunctive words “or” and “and”-

The word ‘and’ is normally Conjunctive and the word ‘or’ is normally Disjunctive going by the
application of Literal rule. Ordinarily "or" does not mean "and " and vice versa. But at times they
are read as vice versa to give effect to the manifest intent of the legislature as disclosed from the
context. In conjunctive statutes describing the elements of a crime, for example, every single item
on the list must be proved for someone to be found guilty of that crime. In disjunctive statutes,
proof of any one of the elements is sufficient.

Case:

Sanjay Dutt v. State (1944)

42
 UNIT 18: Interpretation with reference to subject matter

1. Remedial Statutes (Liberal Interpretation)

Legislations that have some beneficial object, or try to bring in some type of social reform by
improving the condition of certain class of persons

Should receive liberal construction

If there is some doubt/ambiguity, it is resolved in favour of the class of persons for whose benefit
the legislation is enacted

The term remedial means opposite to penal. It is a statute which provides a remedy. The object of
remedial statute is either to redress some existing grievances or introduce some new regulation or
proceeding conducive to the public good. Remedial statutes are also known as Welfare, Beneficent
or Social justice oriented legislations. These statutes keep the system of jurisprudence up to date
and in harmony with new ideas or new conceptions of what Constitutes just and proper human
conduct. Their legitimate purpose is to advance human rights and relationships.

UOI v. Prabhakaran Vijay Kumar- 123(c) of Railways Act, 1989- provision for compensation-
accidental falling of passenger from train is untoward accident-whether it covers person who fell
down and died while boarding

B. Shah v. Presiding Officer, Labour Court- S. 5 of Maternity Benefit Act-payment of wage for
actual absence immediately preceding and including the day of delivery and for 6 weeks
immediately following-whether Sundays included

43
The Rule of Strict Interpretation
One of the concepts used to interpret fiscal and penal statutes is the strict rule of interpretation.
According to this rule, words that are used in everyday speech by the general public to whom this
law applies are given a simple, clear, and straight meaning. There can be no assumption by the
court about what something means. By assuming that a word has a certain meaning because that
was the purpose of the legislature, the court cannot give it that meaning. The Court cannot give
meaning to words that aren't clear and where contextual meaning cannot be inferred under the
pretext of a possible or likely purpose of the legislature.

2. Penal Statute (Strict Interpretation)

Provide penalties for disobedience

Receive strict construction-in the interests of personal liberty

Any doubt/ambiguity resolved in favour of alleged offender

A Penal statute is one that gives a fine or other punishment for breaking the law. A law that makes
something illegal or sets a sentence is taken very seriously. In the past, even small crimes were
punished with harsh punishments. The strict building rule The Penal Statutes came about because
punishments back then were very harsh.

If there are two possible and reasonable ways to interpret a penal rule, the Court must lean toward
the one that lets the person off the hook rather than the one that makes them pay a fine. It is not up
to the Court to change the meaning of a phrase that was used by the legislature in order to do what
the legislature wanted to do. The basic rule of strict interpretation of penal statutes is that a person
can't be punished without a clear letter of the law. In the case of criminal laws, assumptions or
presumptions are irrelevant.

Aparna A. Shah v. Sheth Developers-Only drawer of cheque liable under Section 138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act-not person who had negotiated transaction and held joint account with
the accused

Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment

44
of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or
in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount
of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds
the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such
person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other
provisions of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for 19 [a term which may be extended to
two years], or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both

Fisher v. Bell-Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959-“sells or offers for sale”-display of

knife with price is exposure for sale

3. Taxing Statute
A. 265 of Constitution-No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law

Subject of tax, person liable and tax rate should be clear

Receives strict construction-no room for consideration of hardship or equity, nothing is to be read
in or implied-effect is to be given to language used only

Taxation statute is a fiscal statute which imposes the pecuniary burden on the taxpayer. So such
statutes are construed strictly. Plain, clear and direct grammatical meaning is given. Where there
are two possible outcomes then that interpretation is given which is in favour of assessee.

In a Taxation statute, if a word has a clear meaning, then in that case, the court is bound to follow
the clear meaning even if such meaning results in absurd results. It is in legislature’s domain to
rectify such absurdity. In case of taxation statutes, Courts cannot extend the scope of law by giving
meanings to word which are unclear or uncertain. This is based on the reason that if legislature
had thought of such situation then it would have covered it by using appropriate description and
words under the principal act or taxation authority would have issued some notification clarifying
the same.

45
Rajasthan Rajya Sahakari Spinning and Ginning Mills Federation Ltd. V. Deputy CIT
Jaipur-Section 72-A of the Income Tax Act-losses of an amalgamating company can be carried
forward and set off against profits of an amalgamated company-not available to cooperative
societies

Provisions relating to carry forward and set off of accumulated loss and unabsorbed depreciation
allowance in certain cases of amalgamation where there has been an amalgamation of a company
owning an industrial undertaking or a ship with another company and the Central Government

UNIT 19: Principles of Constitutional Interpretation

1. Principle of Colorable Legislation

The doctrine of Colourable Legislation is based on the maxim ‘what cannot be done directly,
cannot be done indirectly’. It restricts legislatures from indirectly doing something which, due to
want of jurisdiction, they can not do directly. This may be direct or indirect. In the case of the
latter, the expression ‘colourable legislation’ is applied. In other words, colourable legislation is a
‘fraud on the constitution’.

In our Constitution, this doctrine is usually applied to Article 246 which separates the legislative
competencies of the Parliament and the State legislative assemblies by stating the different subject
under the different lists under Schedule VII upon which the respective legislature can draft the
laws. This doctrine comes into the fire when the legislature drafts a law which it is not competent
to draft and the fate of the same law is decided by the courts using the doctrine of colourable
legislation.

State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh, 1952

The case was about whether or not the Bihar Land Reforms Act of 1950 was legal under the
Constitution. Before the state acquired his property, the law said that the landlord's land rent should
go to the state. But as payment, half of this was to be given to the owner.

The Supreme Court said that this was a clear case of theft, since taking the whole thing and giving
46
back half is the same as taking half. It was supposed to set up rules for reimbursement, but in
reality, it was just about confiscation, which is on the concurrent list. So, the Bihar Land Reforms
Act was a law with a lot of gray areas, so it was not valid.

2. Principle of Pith and Substance

Perhaps the most widely applied doctrine, ‘pith and substance’ means the ‘true nature and
character’. It is used to determine what the true nature of an enactment is and which list or
legislative domain it falls under. To determine this, the court needs to look at:

The enactment as a whole;

Its main objects; and

The effect and scope of its provisions.

If a legislature interferes on the field of another legislature, the court looks at whether this
interference is in fact, in substance or merely incidental to the statute. The primary essence and
object are differentiated from its ultimate or incidental results.

In determining the true nature, the name given to the statute is immaterial. Even if the purpose laid
down in its Statement of Object and Reasons is wrong, it would not per se render the statute invalid.
Instead, the statute needs to be viewed as an organic whole.

This doctrine allows some flexibility to the rigid scheme of distribution of powers in the Indian
Constitution. The rationale provided is that if every slight or incidental encroachment is struck
down, the legislature’s power would be severely curtailed. and it would not be able to carry out its
duties.

Article 246 lists the legislative authority stated in the lists under the Seventh Schedule, which
serves as an example of the application of this doctrine.

47
3. Principle of Eclipse

The doctrine of eclipse under Indian laws is a legal doctrine that states that any existing law which
is inconsistent with fundamental rights does not completely become invalid. This doctrine is
related to Article 13 of the Indian Constitution which talks about laws inconsistent with or in
derogation of fundamental rights. Article 13(1) states that any existing law in force before the start
of the Constitution within the territory of India which goes against or is inconsistent with
fundamental rights, present in Part III of the Indian Constitution, becomes void to the extent of
such inconsistency. Further, Article 13(2) states that any new law becomes void the moment it
comes into violation of fundamental rights, to the extent of such violation. These provisions are
directly in consonance with the doctrine of severability. This doctrine states any provision of a
statute which is against the Constitution will be severed from that act and will be considered void
to that extent only.

In the case of P. Rathiram v. Union of India (1994), the constitutional validity of Section 309 of
the Indian Penal Code, which punishes attempts to commit suicide, was questioned. It was ruled
that Section 309 was violative of Article 19 which along with the right to freedom of speech also
gives the right to not speak. Further, it was said that the section was violative of Article 21 which
by extrapolation also gave the right to not live.

This was held to be an invalid finding in Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996). Thus, in essence,
the Rathiram case had eclipsed Section 309 with fundamental rights which got removed by the
Gian judgement.

4. Principle of Severability

This doctrine of severability is also known as the doctrine of separability. It makes it clear that
when some of the provisions of a statute when some of the provisions of a statute becomes
unconstitutional on account of inconsistency with fundamental rights, only the repugnant provision
of the law in question shall be treated by the courts as void, and not the whole statute.

48
The doctrine of severability means that when some particular provision of a statute offends or is
against a constitutional limitation, but that provision is severable from the rest of the statute, only
that offending provision will be declared void by the Court and not the entire statute.

The doctrine of severability was even used in the case of Minerva Mills vs Union of India where
section 4 of 55 of the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 was struck down for being beyond the amending
power of the Parliament and then it had declared the rest of the Act as valid.

5. Principle of Territorial Nexus

Under the Indian conception of federalism, a state law that has operation outside the given state is
invalid. The doctrine of territorial nexus is invoked to find out if the law in question has an
operation beyond its jurisdiction.

This doctrine says:

1. Territory: The object that a law applies to doesn't have to be on the exact territory of the state.
Instead, it needs to have a strong enough link to the state that is making the law.

2. There needs to be a connection between the state making the law and what the law is about. The
link must be real and not just an illusion. Also, the responsibility that is put on the person must be
related to the connection.

Under article 245 of the Indian constitution, it has been stated that:

1. Parliament has jurisdiction to make laws for extraterritorial operations or laws for the
whole or any part of the country.
2. The state legislature has the jurisdiction to make laws for the whole or any part of the
state.

Thus it can be said that both the union and the state have their own territorial jurisdiction to make
laws.

49
 UNIT 20: Mimansa Rules of Interpretation

“Mimansa '' (or Mimangsa) is a scripture related to Hindu Religion and is considered the most
important tool for the interpretation of other Hindu Scriptures. The meaning of Mimansa refers to
the act of taking serious concern over the religious matters stated in the Vedas. It provides
particular methods for interpreting the matters stated in the scriptures like ‘Vedas’, ‘Smirities’ etc.
In the course of interpretation, there can be found many methods of interpretation given by Manu,
Yagyabalkya, Narad, Vyas, Bhrihaspati and others but no concrete method of interpretation is
given by them as given by Jaimini in Mimansa. The Mimansa Principles were the traditional
system of interpretation of legal texts. Although originally they were created for interpreting
religious texts [pertaining to the Yagya sacrifice], gradually they came to be utilized for
interpreting legal texts and also for interpreting texts on philosophy, grammar, etc. i.e., they
became of universal application. Thus, Shankaracharya has used the Mimansa adhikaranas in his
bhashya on the Vedanta sutras. There were hundreds of books [all in Sanskrit] written on the
subject, though only a few dozens have survived the ravages of time. Mimangsa is divided into
two parts the first one is the Eastern Mimansa (Purvi Mimangsa) which is propounded by Jaimini
while the other is the Northern Mimansa (Uttar Mimansa or Vrahma Mimangsa). The Purvi
Mimangsa decides about the proper interpretation rules of the Karmakandaparak Mantras and
Vedas while the Uttar Mimangsa (also known as Vedanta consists of the situation of eternity. In
the course of interpretation, the Purvi Mimangsa is the main reference.

1. Atidesha axiom (reference) – the idea of Extrapolation / Analogy (similar to Statute of pari
materia) - interpretation by analogy

Rules regarding one matter are made to bear on another matter In Sardar Mohammad Ansar Khan
v. State of U.P., the controversy was as to which of two clerks appointed on the same day in an
Intermediate College would be senior, and hence entitled to promotion as Head Clerk. Now there
is no rule to serves to this situation. However, Chapter 2, Regulation 3 of the U.P. Intermediate
Education Regulations state that where 2 teachers are appointed on the same day, the senior in age
will be senior. Using the Atidesh Principle of mimansa it was held that the same principle which
applies to teachers should be also applied to clerks, and hence the senior in age would be senior.

50
The atidesh principle originated in the practical difficulty of performing certain yagyas. There are
some yagyas (e.g. agnihotra, darshapurnamani, etc.) whose method of performance is given in
detail in the Brahmanas. These are known as prakriti yagyas. However, there are other yagyas
whose rules are not given anywhere, and these are known as vikriti yagyas. The question arose
how these latter are to be performed? The atidesh principle was created to resolve this difficulty,
and according to this principle the vikriti yagya is to be performed according to the rules of the
prakriti yagya belonging to the same genus

2. Sarthakyata axiom - every word or sentence must have some meaning and that meaning must
be given effect to (similar to the idea of ex visceribus actus - a statute must be read as a whole)

Every word and sentence must have some meaning and purpose

3. Laghava axiom - if there are two possible interpretations, we will take the interpretation that is
simple/shorter, most convenient.

Case: Vinay Khare v. State of UP - two candidates, both had identical marks on a test. How will
this tie be resolved? Ek interview and ek test. Overall the same marks hai but someone scored
more in an interview and someone scored more in a test. So the Laghava rule was applied.
According to the court, the test is a more objective and reliable way to decide the merit and it will
be convenient and less challenging for the examiner to decide the merit. Written test was given
priority over the written test.

This rule of interpretation is no longer used anymore in modern times, as it does not uphold
constitutional validity. When the interpretation is done, the purpose of the statute is taken into
account , not whether it's shorter or longer.

4. Arthaikatva axiom - the same word or sentence that is used in the same place must have the
same meaning. (agar literal sense mein interpret kiya tho usko consistently literal sense mein hi

51
interpret karna hoga) ( same goes for if interpreted figuratively)

Which states that a double meaning should not be attached to a word or sentence occurring at one
and the same place. Such a double meaning is known as a Vakyabheda, and is a fault (dosh).

UNIT 21: Introduction to General Clauses Act

The General Clause Act, 1897 is that sort of act which lay down the essential principle on how the
law should be interpreted. It’s also referred to as the interpretation act. The clause provides legal
terms, methodologies, and expressions that help to get rid of repetition and also provides a typical
set of principles which is employed in legislation. It provides rules on interpretation and expression
to define things more clearly.

What’s the General Rule of Construction?

As the name implies, it governs how contracts and statutes are understood. Most Indian states
consider the concepts customary, not laws. When the dispute is legal, unambiguous legal
documents are constructed. Legal terminology, case conditions, provisions, law, and verbal
agreements shall be examined. We should always utilise the technical and exact definition of any
uncertain word. A near-similar or equitable word allows a term to be reasonably and fairly
evaluated to match the document's objective. This does not mean the terms will be misused. We
either notice an aim of document or an unambiguous everyday pattern of choice for the application
of a statute or how the language will be applied in various circumstances.

Explain kinds of Rule of Construction.

1. The literal rule of construction: – the meaning of words or construction of words should be
done because it was gone by authorities. If the planet is already ambiguous and clearly defined
there’s no need for interpretation.
2. Purposive rule of interpretation: – we should always see what common law was before
making the act. What mischief was corrected by the law? For what purpose law was established
and what was the truth reason of remedy?

52
3. Harmonious construction: – meaning of an act should be constructed harmonious with other
articles. A provision of the constitution must be construed and thought of as a neighborhood of the
law and it shouldn’t be conflicted with other Articles and which conform with the Constitution’s
general scheme.
4. Rule of beneficial construction: – when there’s quite two interpretations of the law, one should
prefer which give law and protect the advantage of given legislation. Legislative intent should be
focused. Benefits of interpretation should tend to those that are included therein scheme and not
extended to others.
5. Strict construction of penal statutes: – there’s two possibility of interpretation, the one who
attracts penalty and one who doesn’t. The court should more incline to ones who didn’t attract a
penalty.
The overall Clauses Act's objective is to combine different laws concerning the interpretation of
words and legal principles that would otherwise have to be specified separately across several Acts
and Regulations.

Essential definitions under the General Clauses Act-

Section 3 of the Act is the main section containing definitions that apply to the act itself and all
the central acts and legislation post-1897. The General Clauses Act does not apply when the acts
contain separate and specific definitions of their own or when the subject or context of the term is
objectionable. Section 3 defines 67 terms and phrases usually used in legislation and intends to act
as a dictionary for the terms and phrases. Some of the essential terms and phrases include:

1. Section 3(2) “Act”: When rendering a crime or a civil wrong, the term “act” relates to a series
of actions and expressions pertaining to acts done and to whether legal or illegal omissions. An act
necessary to perform does not have to be positive; it can also include acts prohibited by decree.
This term is based on Indian Penal Code sections 32 and 33 and relates to civil and criminal
wrongdoings. The term ‘act’ encompasses both legal and unlawful omissions but excludes non-
legal omissions.

2. Section 3(3) “Affidavit”: Affidavits shall contain affirmation and declaration in the context of
those permitted by law to affirm or declare rather than swear. The definition provided above is
broad in scope. Affidavits must include affirmations and declarations, according to the law. The

53
affidavit is not defined in this definition. However, in common usage, we may grasp this phrase.
An affidavit is a written document verified by oath or affirmation and intended to be used as
evidence in court or before any authority.

3. Section 3(7) “Central Act”: A ‘Central Act’ is a piece of legislation passed by Parliament that
includes:

● A statute of the Dominion Legislature or the Indian Legislature enacted before the Constitution’s
inception, and

● An Act passed by the Governor-General in Parliament or his or her legislative capacity before
the act’s commencement;

4. Section 3(13) “Commencement”: When referring to the Acts or legislation, the term
“commencement” refers to the date on which the Law or legislation becomes effective. The
procedure by which legislation, rules, treaties, and other regulatory frameworks gain legal
authority and become effective is referred to as commencement. A law cannot be considered in
effect unless put into effect through legislative action or through the application of authority by an
authorized representative to do so.

5. Section 3(18) “Document”: Any matter written, conveyed, or characterized on any material by
way of letters, figures, or symbols, or even by more than either of those means to record that matter,
will be referred to as a “document.”

6. Section 3(22) “Good Faith”: Under the General Clauses Act, the subject of good faith is a
factual one and is to be determined based on the specific facts of each instance. As a result,
anything handled with proper care and attention that isn’t malicious is deemed to be undertaken in
good faith. The term “good faith” has been defined differently in different enactments. The
definition of good faith does not apply to any law that specifies a unique meaning of the term
“good faith,”. This definition is only appropriate if the subject or context is not objectionable, and
if such is the case, the term is not relevant.

7. Section 3(23) “Government”: The term ‘government’ or ‘the government’ refers to state and
central governments. As a result, whenever the term “government” is mentioned, it refers to central
and state governments. The explanation clarifies that the word “government,” often used as a

54
simple acronym, can be used in either of the two meanings mentioned depending on the context.
The Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary are the three wings of government in general;
yet, it only refers to the Executive in a narrow sense. As a result, the meaning to get attributed to
that expression is contingent on the situation it is employed in.

8. Section 3(27) “Imprisonment”: ‘Imprisonment’ means any type of detention as specified in

the Indian Penal Code, 1860. According to section 53 of the IPC, offenders are subject to one of
two types of imprisonment: harsh (i.e., with hard labor) or simple (i.e., with no hard labor). As a
result, when an Act specifies that an act is punishable by sentence, the Court may, at its authority,
make the imprisonment strict or light.

9. Section 3(29) “Indian Law”: ‘Indian law’ means:

● Any Act, ordinance, legislation, rule, order, by-law, or another instrument having legal force in
any province of India or part thereof before the beginning of the Constitution.

● Any law that has the legal force in any Part A or Part C state or part thereof after the
commencement of the Constitution but does not involve any Act of British parliament or any Order
in Council, rule, or other component made under such Act.

10. Section 3(65) “Writing”: The term “writing” includes printing, lithography, photography, and
other ways of displaying or reproducing words in visible forms.

UNIT 22: Treaty Interpretation under International Law (Vienna Convention

of the Law of Treaties)

Treaty interpretation is central to the work of international lawyers. One of the principal tools used
by the International Section attorneys for this purpose is the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law
of Treaties. The convention, which is based on draft articles prepared by the International Law
Commission, applies to agreements between countries and is widely regarded as codifying
customary international law on treaties with some necessary augmentations and clarifications.

Article 31 to Article 33 of the Vienna Convention of the law of treaties dictate the rules regarding
the interpretation of the treaties which can be summarized into three rules that are:

55
1. Analyzing the actual text of the agreement.

2. The intention of the parties negotiating on the treaty.

3. Consideration of the object and purpose of the treaty.

The international court of justice stated in Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission
of a State to the UN that the court must interpret the treaty in everyday language. The international
court says interpretation "is a judicial function whose purpose is to figure out the exact meaning
of a provision, but cannot change it." A treaty's history and preparation activities (travaux
pr'eparatoires) can illustrate how it functions. Article 33 states that if there is no agreement and a
difference in meaning that cannot be resolved through normal means of interpreting the texts, the
meaning that best fits the treaty's purpose and object will be used. Multilateral agreements are
often authenticated in multiple languages.

Article 31: General Rule of Interpretation

1. A treaty must be understood in good faith based on what its words mean in their context and in
light of what it is meant to do.

2 For the purpose of figuring out how to interpret a treaty, the context includes the text, including
its preamble and annexes, as well as:

(a) any agreement related to the treaty that was made between all the parties in connection with
the conclusion of the treaty;

(b) any instrument that was made by one or more parties in connection with the conclusion of the
treaty and accepted by the other parties as an instrument related to the treaty.

Article 32: Supplementary means of interpretation

Extra ways of figuring out what something means, like the work that went into making the treaty
and how it came to be signed, can be used to confirm the meaning that comes from applying Article
31 or to figure out what it means when the Article 31 interpretation:

(a) It leaves the meaning unclear or vague, or

56
(b) It leads to a result that is clearly unreasonable or absurd.

Article 33: Interpretation of treaties authenticated in two or more languages

1. When a treaty has been verified in two or more languages, the text in each language is equally
valid, unless the treaty says or the parties agree that if the texts are different, one text will take
precedence.

2. A version of the treaty in a language other than one in which the text was verified shall be
considered an authentic text only if the treaty says so or if all parties agree.

3. Each authentic copy of the treaty is thought to have the same meaning for each of its words.

4. If a comparison of the authentic texts shows a difference in meaning that is not resolved by
applying articles 31 and 32, the best way to bring the texts together, taking into account the object
and purpose of the treaty, is to use the meaning that best fits both texts.

57