Sailesh Yadav

Principles of Interpretation (Interpretation of Statutes)

Course Objectives :

• To provide basic knowledge to students on different rules and principles of

interpretation of statues and their importance in practice, and

• To sensitize students about these rules and their application in practice.

1. Introduction

a. Meaning of Interpretation of Statute

Interpretation of statute refers to the process of understanding and giving meaning to

the provisions of a law or statute. The interpretation of a statute is necessary because
statutes are often written in complex legal language that may not be easily understood
by the average person.

The term has been derived from the Latin term ‘interpretari’, which means to explain,
expound, understand, or to translate. Interpretation is the process of explaining,
expounding and translating any text or anything in written form. This basically involves
an act of discovering the true meaning of the language which has been used in the
statute. Various sources used are only limited to explore the written text and clarify
what exactly has been indicated by the words used in the written text or the statutes.

The interpretation of a statute involves analyzing the language of the statute,

considering the context in which the statute was passed, and understanding the
purpose of the statute. The interpretation must also take into account any relevant legal
precedents or case law.

Interpretation of statute is important because it helps to ensure that the law is applied
correctly and fairly. Different interpretations of a statute can lead to different outcomes
in legal cases, so it is important for judges, lawyers, and other legal professionals to
have a clear understanding of how to interpret the law so as the law is applied fairly and
consistently.

सं वधान र अ य ऐन कानुनको प रभाषा गदा श दको भाषागत अथ गरेर मा पु दै न । कानुन नमाता अथात
वधा यकाले जुन अथमा सो श दको योग गरेको हो यही अथ गनु कानुन ा याको उ े य मा न छ । कानुन
ा यालाई कसैले वधा यकाको मनसाय प ा लगाउने उपायको पमा लएको पाइ छ भने कसैले व ा पकाले

1
 Sailesh Yadav

योग गरेको श दको सही अथ र उ े य प ा लगाउने उपायको पमा लने गरेको पाइ छ ।
Lord Reid का श दमा, “We often say that we are looking for the intention of parliament but
that is not quite accurate. We are seeking the meaning of the words, which Parliament
used. We are seeking not what Parliament meant but the true meaning of what they said.

According to Salmond: Interpretation and construction is the process by which the

court seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of
authoritative forms in which it is expressed.

According to Blackstone: The most fair and rational method for interpreting a statute is
by exploring the intention of the legislature through texts, the subject matter, the effect
and consequences or the spirit and reason of law.

Construction of Statute is the process where a court gives meaning to an unclear part
of a law to resolve conflicts. Judges consider facts to assign a meaning that aligns with
the law's purpose but isn't directly stated. Interpretation, on the other hand, is about
understanding and conveying the author's intended meaning in words. There's a subtle
difference between the two: interpretation deals with the actual words, while
construction goes beyond them to fill gaps in the law's expression.

b. Objectives of Interpretation of Statute

The objective of interpretation of statutes is to ascertain and give effect to the intention
of the legislature or the law-making body that enacted the statute. When lawmakers
draft statutes, they intend to create rules and regulations that address specific issues,
promote certain objectives, and regulate various aspects of society.

The interpretation of statutes aims to achieve the following objectives:

1. To Determine Legislative Intent: The primary objective is to discern and understand

the intention of the legislature or law-making body behind the enactment of the statute.

2
 Sailesh Yadav

This involves examining the text of the law, its purpose, context, and legislative history
to ascertain the lawmakers' intent.

2. To Clarify the Meaning of the Law: Statutes may not always be clear or explicit in
their wording, and different provisions may be subject to multiple interpretations. The
objective of interpretation is to clarify the meaning of the law, resolve any ambiguities,
and provide guidance on how it should be understood and applied.

3. Promote Certainty and Predictability: The interpretation of statutes helps to establish

consistent and predictable legal principles that govern society. By providing clarity and
resolving ambiguities, it enables individuals, businesses, and legal professionals to
understand their rights and obligations under the law.

4. Ensure Fairness and Justice: Interpretation plays a crucial role in ensuring that
statutes are applied in a manner that promotes fairness and justice. By understanding
the legislative intent, courts can interpret the law in a way that aligns with its underlying
principles and promotes equitable outcomes.

5. Adapt to Changing Circumstances: Statutes are enacted in response to specific

social, economic, or legal issues, but circumstances can change over time. The
interpretation of statutes allows for their application and adaptation to changing
circumstances while still maintaining their underlying purposes and objectives.

6. Maintain the Rule of Law: Interpretation is vital for upholding the rule of law. It
ensures that laws are applied consistently and uniformly, preventing arbitrary or
capricious decision-making. By interpreting statutes in a principled and reasoned
manner, courts contribute to the stability and legitimacy of the legal system.

The ultimate goal is to strike a balance between respecting legislative intent, promoting
fairness, and maintaining legal certainty.

3
 Sailesh Yadav

c. Forms of Interpretation of Statute

Literal or grammatical interpretation : Literal or grammatical interpretation is an

approach to statutory interpretation that emphasizes the strict and plain meaning of the
words and phrases used in a statute. This method involves interpreting the law based
solely on the text of the statute itself, without considering external factors such as
legislative history or policy intent.

In literal or grammatical interpretation:

 Words and phrases are given their ordinary and dictionary meanings.

 The interpreter does not read into the statute any meanings or intentions
beyond what is explicitly stated in the text.

 Ambiguities or gaps in the text are typically resolved in favor of the most
straightforward and grammatical reading.

This approach is often seen as a conservative or strict constructionist method, as it

limits the interpreter's role to applying the statute exactly as written, even if this leads to
outcomes that may seem impractical or unintended. However, in some cases, a literal
interpretation may not produce a just or reasonable result, which is why other methods
of statutory interpretation, such as purposive or teleological interpretation, are also
used to consider the legislative intent and broader context.

Functional or logical interpretation

"Functional interpretation" or "logical interpretation" generally refers to an approach in

statutory interpretation that focuses on the functional or logical purpose of a law. It
involves analyzing the statute to determine its underlying logic, the problem it seeks to
address, and the practical effect it should have.

This approach looks beyond the literal text of the statute and aims to ensure that the
law serves its intended function in a coherent and rational manner. It may involve
considering the legislative purpose, policy objectives, and the overall structure of the
law to arrive at an interpretation that makes logical sense and promotes the law's
intended function.

4
 Sailesh Yadav

In essence, functional or logical interpretation seeks to apply the law in a way that
achieves its intended goals while maintaining a logical and coherent legal framework.
It's a method used by judges and legal scholars to interpret statutes when the plain text
alone does not provide a clear answer to a legal question.

d. Important Principles of Interpretation

It is a fundamental principle that the conflicted word of a statute must be read in its
entire context while doing the interpretation. The purpose, intention of the legislature
and object of that act should remain in the mind while doing the process of
interpretation.

There are some principles of interpretation that should be taken care at the time of
statutory interpretation:

1. The statute must be read as a whole while interpreting any specific law of the
statute

2. Interpretation should be consistent with The intention of the legislature

3. The interpretation must be done in a way that the law should be capable of
implementing.

4. If the meaning of the word is clear and unambiguous, the effect must be given
regardless of the outcome.

5. The process of construction should be the combination of the literal and

opposite approach

6. If the literal construction leads to absurdity, the construction must be shifted to

another rule of interpretation

7. Principle of Harmonious Construction:- According to the rule of interpretation, if

two or more than two provisions of the same statute are conflicting with each
other, in that situation the court will try to construe the provisions in such a way
to give the effect for both the provisions by maintaining the harmony between
both the laws.

5
 Sailesh Yadav

2.Interpretation of Statues

a. Different Parts of Statutes:

1. Titles:- This is the section that provides the name of the statute, which is usually a
brief description of its subject matter.

There are two types of titles that can be used by the court for the interpretation of the
statute that are:

Short Title

This title is the name of the act. It is used for identification and to give the reference of
the act. The short title consists of the name of the act and the year of passing that act.
For example- The National Civil (Code) Act, 2017 (2074), Civil Procedure (Code) Act,
2074 (2017).

Long Title

The long title of the act is mentioned under certain Acts and it is a perfect guide to
identify the object, scope and purpose of the act.

The long title of the statute is used to identify the meaning of the Act. The court of law
uses a long title to remove the confusion in the meaning of the act.

For example- the long title of the civil code says “An Act Made To Amend And
Consolidate Civil Laws ”.

The long title of an Act is a part of the Act and it is admissible as an internal aid to its
construction.

2. Preamble :- This is the introductory part of a statute that provides a brief summary
of the purpose and intent of the law.

A preamble is an introductory statement at the beginning of a statute that sets forth the
purposes, goals, and objectives of the law. The preamble is usually a brief statement
that explains the background and context of the statute and provides a general idea of
what the law aims to achieve.

6
 Sailesh Yadav

The Supreme Court of Nepal in the case of Yagya Murti Banjade Vs. Durga Das
Shrestha (Bagmati Bisesh Adalat) – Harbeus Corpus. ( Nekapa 2027, D No. 547), stated
that the preamble as a part of the Act, if the enacting part is unclear and consists of
ambiguous terms, the preamble may be well equipped tool to explain it, and show the
intention of the law maker. It is the good means of internal aid of interpretation of law.

तावना ऐनको अ भ भाग–यसले ऐनको मूल दफालाई नय ण नगन–मूल दफा अ र ई अथ ला ने

भएमा–यसको सहारा लने– वधा यकाको मनसाय बु न यसलाई हेन–यो संशोधन न स ने । In the
preamble, the legislator has expressed the intention of making the law.

In the case of Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala, the Supreme Court of India said
that the preamble to the constitution of India does not restrict the parliament to amend
the constitution under Article 368. But the Supreme Court also said that the parliament
of India cannot alter the basic structure of the constitution of India.

3. Marginal Notes :- Marginal notes are brief descriptions or summaries of the content
of each section or subsection of a statute. They are usually located in the margins of the
pages and are intended to provide a quick reference guide to the contents of the law. However,
they are not considered part of the text of the statute and do not carry legal weight.

In some cases, the courts may consider marginal notes as an aid to interpretation if the
meaning of the statute is unclear or ambiguous. However, they will only be used as a secondary
source of interpretation, and the substantive provisions of the law will always take precedence.

4. Heading :- The heading of a statute, also known as the title or caption, is the text
that appears at the top of the law and generally provides a brief summary or
description of the law's content. Headings are typically used to help readers quickly
identify the topic or subject matter of a particular statute. For example, the heading
of Section 25 of the Evidence Act, 2031 is "Burden of Proof of Proving an Offence”.

There are two types of headings:

Heading of a section

Heading of a group of sections

7
 Sailesh Yadav

5. Schedules :- In legal contexts, a schedule is a supplementary document or list that

is attached to a primary legal document, such as a contract or a statute. The purpose
of a schedule is to provide additional details or information that is relevant to the main
document but is too extensive or complex to include directly in the text.

For example, a contract may include a schedule that lists the specific goods or services
being provided, along with their prices and delivery dates.

6. Punctuation :- Punctuation refers to the marks used in writing to clarify meaning,

separate ideas, and make the text easier to read. Common punctuation marks include
the period, comma, semicolon, colon, exclamation point, question mark, and quotation
marks.

The period (.) is used to mark the end of a sentence.

The comma (,) is used to separate items in a list, or to separate clauses within a
sentence.

The semicolon (;) is used to join two independent clauses that are closely related in
meaning.

The colon (:) is used to introduce a list, explanation, or example.

The exclamation point (!) is used to indicate strong feeling or emphasis.

The question mark (?) is used to indicate a question.

Quotation marks (" ") are used to indicate direct speech or a quotation from another
source.

Proper use of punctuation is important in conveying clear and accurate meaning in

writing. Different writing styles and contexts may have varying conventions for
punctuation usage.

7. Proviso :- The provisos are given after the main provision of the section. The
provisos start with the words “provided that”. A proviso is a conditional clause or
stipulation in a legal document that sets out a condition that must be met in order for a

8
 Sailesh Yadav

particular provision to apply. A proviso is typically used to modify or qualify a general

rule or statement in the document, and may set out exceptions, limitations, or
exclusions to that rule.

If there is any contradiction between the main enactment and proviso, the proviso
should prevail over the main section. The principle behind this rule is that the proviso
speaks the last intention of the legislature.

8. Exception :- An exception is a situation or circumstance that is excluded from the

general rule or provision of a law, agreement, or contract. It is a specific instance that
does not fall within the scope of the rule or provision, and is therefore not subject to it.

For example, a contract may include a provision that employees are entitled to a 30-
minute lunch break, with no exceptions. However, if an employee is working in a job
where the nature of the work makes it impractical or impossible to take a lunch break,
they may be considered an exception to this provision.

In statutory law, an exception may be included in a law to clarify or limit its application.
For example, a law that prohibits the possession of certain controlled substances may
include an exception for medical use.

Exceptions are often used to ensure that the law or contract is applied fairly and that the
intent of the parties is respected. They may also be used to provide flexibility in certain
situations where adherence to the general rule would be unreasonable or impractical.

b. Commencement, Repeal and Revival of Legislation

The commencement, repeal, and revival of legislation are important aspects of how
laws come into effect, are removed from the legal framework, and can be reinstated.

Commencement: This is the date when a new law or statutory provision officially
comes into effect. It's the point at which the law becomes legally binding and
enforceable.Some laws have a built-in commencement date specified within the
legislation itself. They automatically take effect on that date.Occasionally, a law might
be passed but with a delayed commencement date, allowing for preparation or
transition time.

9
 Sailesh Yadav

Repeal: Repeal refers to the act of formally revoking or abolishing an existing law or
statutory provision.

Effects of Repeal:

 Repeal does not revive anything not in force or existing at the time of repeal.

 It does not affect the previous operation of the repealed Act/Enactment or actions
taken under it.

 It does not impact rights, privileges, obligations, or liabilities acquired under the
repealed law.

 Penalties, forfeitures, or punishments incurred under the repealed law remain

unaffected.

 Ongoing investigations, legal proceedings, or remedies related to the repealed law can
continue or be enforced.

Revival: Revival of legislation involves bringing back into force a law or provision that
had previously been repealed or expired.

These processes are essential for maintaining an up-to-date legal system, removing
obsolete laws, and ensuring that laws that are no longer relevant are not enforced.
Revival mechanisms are used rarely, typically for laws that may need to be temporarily
suspended but later brought back into effect, such as emergency measures.

C. The External Aspects:

Historical Setting : The background events and circumstances that led to the creation
of a particular law are of immense importance when it comes to interpreting that law. In
this regard, it becomes necessary to draw insights from all external or historical facts
that are crucial for understanding the subject matter, scope, and purpose of the law in
question. This involves investigating into the broader history and, specifically, the
legislative history, including ancient statutes, contemporary documents, and reliable
sources. All these contribute to the understanding and interpreting the law accurately.
It's also vital to determine whether the law was designed to make changes to existing
legal norms or to maintain the status quo. It should also be taken into consideration so
that it can be understood that the statute in question was intended to alter the law or

10
 Sailesh Yadav

leave it where it stood.

Dictionaries : Where we find that a word is not defined in the Act itself, it is permissible
to refer to dictionaries to find out the general sense in which that word is understood in
common parlance (language). However, in selecting one out of the several meanings of
a word, we must always take into consideration the context in which it is used in the Act.
It is the fundamental rule that the meanings of words and expressions used in an Act
must take their colour from the context in which they appear. Further, judicial decisions
laying down the meaning of words in construing statutes in ‘pari materia’ will have
greater weight than the meaning furnished by dictionaries. However, for technical terms
reference may be made to technical dictionaries.

References Books: The court while construing an enactment, may refer to the
standard textbooks to clear the meaning. Although, the courts are not bound to accept
such view. Example: in Kesavananda Bharthi case, judges quoted large number of
books.

Parliamentary History and Conventions:- Examining the parliamentary history, such as

debates, committee reports, and speeches made during the legislative process, can
provide insights into the lawmakers' intent when drafting a statute. This can help judges
and legal professionals understand the purpose and objectives behind the law, which
can guide their interpretation. Understanding the historical context in which a statute
was enacted can be crucial. Parliamentary history can provide insights into the social,
political, and economic conditions at the time, which may have influenced the legislative
choices. This context can help in making sense of the statute's provisions.

Past judicial decisions that have relied on parliamentary history or conventions to

interpret statutes can create legal precedent. Subsequent cases may then refer to these
precedents to interpret similar statutes, ensuring consistency in legal interpretation.

d. Consolidating and Codifying Statutes

Codifying statute: Codifying statutes are those statutes which are in written form. The
codifying statute codifies the unwritten law.

11
 Sailesh Yadav

Consolidating statute: These statutes are those statutes which consolidate the law on
a particular subject at one place.

3. Rules of Interpretation

a. General Rules (Literal Rule, Mischief Rule, Golden Rule, Construction ut res magis
valeat quam pereat)

i. Literal Rule ( शा दक नयम)

The meaning of the literal rule of interpretation is to provide the natural and ordinary
meaning to the words used in the law. The rule says that words must be read and
understood in their literal sense. In other words, judges should interpret the law based
solely on the text of the statute and its grammatical structure, even if the result seems
unjust or undesirable. This rule gives reference to the supremacy of the parliament. The
literal rule of interpretation is also known as the grammatical rule of interpretation. It is
the first rule to integrate the statutes and laws by the judiciary. Also, it is the most
usable rule of interpretation. The Literal Rule is one of several rules of statutory
interpretation, and its application can sometimes lead to rigid or counterintuitive
outcomes.

When a court starts doing a literal interpretation of statute;

Firstly the court will identify the natural, ordinary or popular meaning of that word.

Second, the court will check whether:

 The interpretation done by the court creating some absurdity or not?

 Does the interpretation solve the purpose of the statute?

 Is the interpretation contrary to the object of the statute?

If the interpretation done by the court is not creating absurdity and it is not contrary to
the object of the statute then the court will apply the literal rule of interpretation.

12
 Sailesh Yadav

But in a case, where the literal interpretation is done by the court is contrary or creates
absurdity, then the court will apply another rule for the interpretation of that word.

ऐनमा श दको ा या भएमा यही ा या दनुपछ, नभए कानुन ा या स ब ी ऐनको ा या आकृ छर

सो प न नभए श दकोषको अथ (Dictionary Meaning) दनपछ ।

Cases:

R v Harris (1836)

In this case, a person bit the nose of a person. A criminal case was filed in the court of
law where the court applied the literal rule of interpretation and held that the act of
biting by the defendant does not come within the meaning of stab cut or wound
because these words imply that there must be the use of an instrument. But in this case,
there is no instrument used by the defendant. Therefore the defendant was not guilty
and acquitted.

इ बहा र गु ङ व . राज यायाधीकरण, काठमाड

शा दक ा या लाई ाकर णक ा या प न भ न छ । शा दक ा याको अ भ ाय हो व धको पमा
ल पव ग रएका व धका श द (Litralogis) ह को स जलो र वाभा वक अथ गनु अथात व धमा योग
ग रएका श दह को ाकरण अनुसार अथ गनु, यसलाई ग णतको हसाबले अथ गनु भने प न छ ।

रामलखन महतो कोइरी व . रामभजन राय यादव समेत , ने.का.प. २०७०, अङ् क ४, नणय नं.८९९४
If the purpose and intention of the law is fulfilled by literal interpretation or literal
meaning of words, then literal interpretation should be done. However, in some cases, if
the literal interpretation does not reflect the spirit and purpose of the existing laws and
legal documents, then the golden rule of interpretation should be followed.

यायको रोहमा कानूनका भावना र उ े य समेट्ने गरी कानूनको सकारा मक प , भावना र ममलाई भे ाउन कानून,
फै सला वा आदे शलगायत कानूनी लखतमा योग भएका श दह को सम पृ भू म, भावना र ममलाई समेत
मनन् गरी शा दक ा याभ दा पर गई वण म ा या (Golden Rule of Interpretation) प न गनुपन ।

13
 Sailesh Yadav

Mischief Rule ( कृ त नयम)

When the literal rule of interpretation is not applicable on the statute to remove the
ambiguity and to know the intention of the legislature, the court can take other rules of
interpretation where the mischief rule of interpretation is also part of these rules.

Mischief rule of interpretation is also known as:

Rule of beneficial construction.

Heydon’s rule

Purposive construction

Firstly, the rule of mischief was developed in Heydon’s case in 1584 and that is why this
rule is also called Heydon’s rule.

The application of the mischief rule of interpretation is done to prevent the misuse of
the provisions given in the statute.

There are mainly four points that have to be followed while using the mischief rule of
interpretation which are as follows:

i. What was the law (common law or statute) before the making of the statute?

ऐन आउनु भ दा प हलेको Common Law के थयो अथात ऐन ब ुपूव यस वषयको ऐनले के ावधान राखेको
थयो ।

ii. What was the mischief or defects in the previous law?

च लत कमन ल को कु न चा ह कृ त वा खराबीलाई हटाउन वतमान ऐन आएको हो । अथात सा वकको ऐनले

कु न खराबी हटाउन नसके कोले वतमान ऐन आएको वा यसमा संशोधन भएको हो ।

iii. What was the remedy that was sought by parliament?

वा तवमा नयाँ ऐन अ तरगत वधा यकाले मुलुकमा कु न कारको उपचारको अपे ा गरेको हो, वा खराबीको
नदानको ला ग क तो व ा गन खोजेको हो ।

14
 Sailesh Yadav

iv. What is the true reason behind the remedy?

उपचारको सही तक र कारण के हो ।

These are four points that should be taken into consideration while doing the
interpretation of statute with the help of the mischief rule. The main purpose of the rule
of mischief is to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.

ा याको यो स ा त अनुसार व ा पकाले इ त पमा एक क समका कृ त हटाउन ऐन बनाएकोमा

अदालतले अ कु नै कृ त वा खराबी हटाउने गरी ा या गन म दै न । ा याको यो नयम वगत र वतमान
बीचको अ तरलाई सम वय गरी वधा यकाले गन खोजेको सुधार वा उपचारलाई जीव तता दान गन प सँग
स ब त छ । बेलायतमा यो स ा त तपादन ँदाका बखत नकै कम ऐनह थए र यसबेला खासगरी कमन
ल कै दबदबा थयो । कमन ल ले दान गन नसके को उपचार र सुधारको स ामा ऐनह ब े स दभमा ा याको
यो नयमले ज म लएको दे ख छ ।
And the disadvantage of the rule of mischief is that it allows the judiciary to apply their
opinions which is an infringement of the separation of powers.

हा ो स ब मा सा वक ऐनको साटो नयाँ ऐन आएकोमा वा सा वक ऐनमा भएका संशोधनको स दभमा पुरानो

कानुनले हटाउन नसके को कु न खराबी वा दान गन नसके को नयाँ उपचार दान गन यो नयमको सा द भकता
रह छ ।

Cases:

Smith V Hughes (1960)

Street Offences Act 1959 ले वे याह ले सडक ग लीमा बटु वा ाहकह लाई लो याउन वा फकाउन
(Soliciting) तब लगाएको थयो । तर वे याह ले सडकबाट नभई बा कोनी (बादली, कौशी) वा यालबाट
सो ल सट गरेकोमा यसलाई सडकबाट फकाएको भ े नभ े उ ो । यसमा Lord Parker भ छन् – यो
ऐनले हटाउन खोजेको कृ त के हो भ म सो चरहेको छु । सबैलाई के कु रा थाहा छ भने यो ऐनको मु य उ े य
ग लीह सफा गनु (याने वे याह ले फकाउन नपाउने गनु) हो अथात् बटु वाह लाई बाटोमा हड् दा बे याह ले
न ज काउन् र बटु वा वत हड् न पाउन् भ े हो । यही आधारमा अथात् ऐनले हटाउन खोजेको कृ तलाई यान
मा राखी अदालतले बा कोनी र यालबाट ज काइरहेकालाई प न सडकबाट ज काएको नै मा यो ।

15
 Sailesh Yadav

The defendants were prostitutes who had been charged under the Street Offences Act
1959 which made it an offence to solicit in a public place. The prostitutes were
soliciting from private premises in windows or on balconies so could be seen by the
public.

Held:- The court applied the mischief rule holding that the activities of the defendants
were within the mischief the Act was aimed at even though under a literal interpretation
they would be in a private place.

डा. के .आई. सह, ी ५ को सरकार, (ने.का.प. २०२२, पृ. ५६)

अदालतले कु न ऐनको ा या गदा ऐनका श दाथ तफ मा यान न दई कानुन नमाताले कु न खराबीलाई हटाउन
र कु न मनसाय (intention) लएर सो ऐन नमाण गरेको हो, यसतफ प न यान दनु आव यक नजा छ ।

Golden Rule ( वण म ा या)

The Golden Rule is one of the principles used in the interpretation of
statutes or laws. It is often applied when the literal interpretation of a
statute would lead to an absurd, unjust, or unreasonable result. In such
cases, the Golden Rule allows judges to depart from the strict literal
interpretation and instead interpret the words or provisions of the statute in
a way that avoids the absurdity or injustice while still giving effect to the
overall intention of the lawmakers.

There are two forms of the Golden Rule:

Narrow/Modified Golden Rule: Under this version, judges can choose a permissible
interpretation that deviates slightly from the literal meaning of the words in the statute
but only to the extent necessary to avoid the absurd or unjust outcome. The
interpretation should still be as close as possible to the ordinary meaning of the words.

Wide/General Golden Rule: This version allows judges to go further in departing from

16
 Sailesh Yadav

the literal meaning of the words in the statute if necessary to achieve a reasonable and
just result. This approach gives judges more discretion in interpretation.

The Golden Rule is a tool that helps to reconcile the literal wording of a statute with the
broader purpose and intention of the law.

The "Golden Rule" of interpretation is like a fix for laws when they don't make sense as
written. Normally, judges try to understand what lawmakers meant by the words in a law,
sticking to their plain meaning. But if this leads to something absurd, unfair, or weird,
they can use the Golden Rule to tweak the meaning just a bit, but not too much, to make
things right. It's like a judge's way of saying, "I know what the law says, but that doesn't
make sense, so I'll change it a little to make it fair and sensible." However, they can't
change the whole law, just a part of it to avoid problems.

Cases:

R V. Allen (1872) LR 1 CCR 367

The defendant was charged with the offence of bigamy under s.57 of the Offences
Against the Person Act 1861. The statute states 'whosoever being married shall marry
any other person during the lifetime of the former husband or wife is guilty of an
offence'. Under a literal interpretation of this section the offence would be impossible to
commit since civil law will not recognise a second marriage any attempt to marry in
such circumstances would not be recognised as a valid marriage.

Held:- The court applied the golden rule and held that the word 'marry' should be
interpreted as 'to go through a marriage ceremony'. The defendant's conviction was
upheld.

Bedford Vs Bedford in 1935

In the Bedford vs. Bedford case in 1935, there was a family dispute over who should get
the property after a son killed his mother and then himself. The law said that if there's

17
 Sailesh Yadav

no will, the property should go to the "issue" of the deceased person.

Now, if we strictly followed the literal meaning of "issue," it would mean the son gets the
property, but he was also dead. So, the property should logically go to his children (the
son's descendants).

But here's the twist: the court thought it wouldn't be right to reward someone for
committing a crime (in this case, the son who killed his mother). So, they interpreted
"issue" more broadly and decided to give the property to the mother's relatives instead,
rather than the son's descendants, to avoid benefiting from the crime.

So, in this case, the court used the Golden Rule to make the law fairer by considering the
broader implications and not just the literal words.

रामलखन महतो कोइरी व . रामभजन राय यादव समेत , ने.का.प. २०७०, अङ् क ४, नणय नं.८९९४
If the literal interpretation does not reflect the spirit and purpose of the existing laws
and legal documents, then the golden rule of interpretation should be followed.

यायको रोहमा कानूनका भावना र उ े य समेट्ने गरी कानूनको सकारा मक प , भावना र ममलाई भे ाउन कानून,
फै सला वा आदे शलगायत कानूनी लखतमा योग भएका श दह को सम पृ भू म, भावना र ममलाई समेत
मनन् गरी शा दक ा याभ दा पर गई वण म ा या (Golden Rule of Interpretation) प न गनुपन ।

Lee Vs Knapp (1967)

In this case, a person's parked car was hit by another driver. After the collision, the
second driver briefly stopped but then left without providing any information. Later, the
second driver's manager came to provide the details.

The law (Section 77 of the Road Traffic Act 1960) says that after an accident, a driver
must stop and share their information. The defendant argued that they did stop, just

18
 Sailesh Yadav

that they sent their manager with the details instead of staying themselves.

The court had to decide if the defendant's brief stop met the legal requirement. If they
strictly followed the literal rule, it might seem like the defendant wasn't guilty because
they did stop, even if briefly.

However, the court applied the Golden Rule of interpretation. They said that "stop"
should mean stopping for a reasonable amount of time to give information. So, in this
case, a brief stop wasn't enough, and the defendant was found guilty because they
didn't stop for a reasonable time to fulfill their legal duty.

Matibullah Musalman V. Civil Library, Harihar Bhavan, Lalitpur et.al.

If the literal interpretation of the law does not yield a logical, sensible, practical and just
meaning of the law, then the golden rule of interpretation should be followed without
following the literal interpretation of the law and a clear interpretation should be given
that suits the context of the law.

Construction ut res magis valeat quam pereat (Doctrine of

Harmonious Construction)

"Ut res magis valeat quam pereat" is a Latin legal maxim that means "that a
thing may rather have effect than be made void." In legal interpretation, this
principle suggests that when there is doubt or ambiguity in a contract or
legal document, the interpretation that gives the document effect or
purpose should be preferred over an interpretation that renders it
meaningless or void.

When there is a conflict between two or more Statues or two or more parts
of a Statute then the Rule of Harmonious Construction needs to be adopted.
Every Statute has a purpose and intent as per Law and should be read as a

19
 Sailesh Yadav

whole. While using the Harmonious Rule the Interpretation should be

consistent with all the provisions of the Statute.

The Principle of Harmonious Construction stems from the idea that the
Legislature wouldn't want its own laws to contradict each other. The
Legislature intends for all provisions to have meaning and effect. When two
provisions clash and can't both be applied, it's better to interpret them in a
way that resolves the inconsistency, allowing both provisions to coexist
and work together harmoniously, rather than rendering one useless. This
principle aligns with the idea of preserving the effectiveness of laws, known
as "ut res magis valeat quam pereat."

In simpler terms, it encourages courts to interpret laws in a way that makes

them work and have meaning, rather than interpreting them in a way that
would invalidate them or render them useless.

b. Beneficial Rule
The Beneficial Rule of Interpretation is a principle used in statutory interpretation that
emphasizes interpreting laws in a manner that promotes justice, fairness, and the
overall well-being or benefit of certain class or group of people. Beneficial Rule is
applied in Special law.

Case: B. Shah V. Presiding Officer, A.I.R. 1978

In the case of B. Shah vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Coimbatore, the Supreme
Court was asked whether Sundays, considered wage-less holidays, should be excluded
when calculating maternity benefits. The Supreme Court ruled that Sundays should be
included, applying the beneficial rule of construction in favor of women workers. The
court emphasized that maternity benefits, according to the law and Article 42 of the
Constitution, are meant not only for the woman's survival but also to help her recover,
take care of her child, and maintain her efficiency as a worker. The law provides these
benefits to support the woman during a period when she cannot work and needs extra
funds for medical expenses, ensuring her well-being and productivity.

20
 Sailesh Yadav

c. Subsidiary Rule

i. ejusdem generise Rule

Ejusdem generis is a Latin term that means "of the same kind." This secondary
rule of interpretation is applied when a list of specific words in a statute is
followed by a more general term. The rule suggests that the general term should
be interpreted to include only things of the same kind as the specific ones
mentioned. In other word, When specific words are followed by general ones, the
general words are limited to things of the same kind as those specified by the
specific words.

Ejusdem generis is employed as an interpretive principle to address ambiguity in

statutes. It helps ensure a consistent and harmonious interpretation when specific and
general terms coexist in a list. The rule assumes that the specific terms mentioned in
the list are intended to cover a particular category or class of things. Therefore, the
general term is understood to include only items that are of the same nature or kind as
those specifically listed. Ejusdem generis is used to prevent an overly broad
interpretation of the general term that could go beyond the specific examples provided.
It restricts the scope of the general term to maintain a connection with the specific
terms.

Application Example:- Suppose a statute prohibits the entry of "dogs, cats, rabbits, or
other animals" into a public park. Applying ejusdem generis, the term "other animals"
would be interpreted to include only animals of the same kind as dogs, cats, and rabbits.

Case:

21
 Sailesh Yadav

Limitations and Considerations:

 If the general words are there before the specified words then this doctrine
cannot be applied. Therefore it is necessary that specific words must be
followed by the general words.

 If the specific words in the provision of the statute which have been followed by
the general words do not form a distinct genus or class then this rule cannot be
applied. In other words, these specific words should share a common
characteristic or category that sets them apart from the general term.

22
 Sailesh Yadav

 If the specified words exhaust the whole genus or class then this doctrine is not
applicable and in these cases the general word will be given a wider meaning or a
different genus/class as those specified words have already exhausted the
whole genus and nothing would be left to be included in the general words.

 If there is a contrary intention of the legislation for the application of the rule of
ejusdem generis, then this rule cannot be applied.

Ejusdem generis is a rule of construction, not a strict formula. Its application depends
on the legislative intent and context. Courts may consider the context, purpose, and
overall scheme of the statute when applying ejusdem generis.

The Courts by improperly using the rule of Ejusdem Generis, changes the whole
meaning of the provision and thus defeats the purpose of the Act, as to the intent of the
legislation. This results in miscarriage of Justice.

State Of Bombay v. Ali Gulshan, 1955 Supreme Court: The Supreme Court in this case
held that the decision of the High Court was in error and therefore it rejected the
decision of the High Court and concluded that the High Court had not used the doctrine
of Ejusdem Generis properly and the doctrine should not have been applied in this case.

In Summary: Ejusdem generis is a rule used to interpret statutes with lists of specific
and general terms. It helps avoid ambiguity and ensures that the general term is
understood in a manner consistent with the specific examples provided.

ii. noscitur a sociis

Noscitur a sociis is a Latin term that means "it is known by its associates." This
secondary rule of interpretation is applied when interpreting unclear words or phrases in
a statute by considering the context of the surrounding words. It suggests that the
meaning of a word is influenced or clarified by the words associated with it.

Noscitur a sociis directs interpreters to consider the context in which a particular word

23
 Sailesh Yadav

or phrase is used within a statute. The meaning of an unclear term is derived from the
words with which it is associated.

Application Example:- Consider a statute that prohibits "loud music, shouting, or other
disturbances" in a public area. Applying noscitur a sociis, the term "other disturbances"
would be interpreted in the context of noise-related issues similar to loud music and
shouting.

In Summary:- Noscitur a sociis is a rule of statutory interpretation that advises looking

at the words surrounding an unclear term to understand its meaning. By considering the
context and the associated words, this rule contributes to a more nuanced and accurate
interpretation of statutory language.

iii. reddendo singula singulis

Reddendo singula singulis is a Latin term that means "referring each to each." This
secondary rule of interpretation is applied when a statute uses a list of words without
clearly indicating to which preceding term each subsequent term relates. It helps to
attribute each term to its corresponding antecedent. This rule states that in a sentence
with several antecedents and consequents, each word or phrase should be linked to its
appropriate place.

Application Example:- Suppose a statute states that "apples, oranges, and fruit must be
labeled." Applying reddendo singula singulis, "apples" would be interpreted to be labeled,
"oranges" would be labeled, and "fruit" would be labeled as well. The rule ensures that
each term is connected to its corresponding requirement.

iv. expressio unius est exclusio alterius Rule

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius is a Latin legal maxim that translates to "the
expression of one is the exclusion of the other." This rule of interpretation suggests that
when certain things are expressly mentioned in a statute, contract, or legal document,
the intention is to exclude all others not mentioned.

24
 Sailesh Yadav

The rule implies that if the drafters of a document intentionally include specific items,
individuals, or situations, there is an implicit exclusion of others. The absence of
mention is considered intentional.

Application Example:- Suppose a contract states, "The following pets are allowed in
the apartment: dogs, cats, and birds." Applying Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius,
the implication is that only dogs, cats, and birds are permitted, and other types of pets
are excluded.

In Bennettt Coleman v. Union of India (& R.C. Cooper v. UOI) The SC interpreted the
term ‘citizen’ and clearly laid down that the freedoms under Article 19 cannot be
claimed by non-citizens nor by the legal persons as they are not citizens. However,
Indian citizens may claim these freedoms through their legal persons because the relief
ultimately goes to the citizens and not to the legal persons.

v. contemporanea expositio

Definition: Contemporanea expositio is a Latin term that means "contemporary

exposition" or "contemporary interpretation." This secondary rule of interpretation
suggests that the way a law is understood and applied at the time of its enactment
provides insight into the legislative intent.

Key Principles/ Focuses:

 Historical Context:- Contemporanea expositio emphasizes considering the

historical context surrounding the enactment of a statute. It suggests that the
interpretation of a law should be influenced by the understanding and practices
prevalent at the time of its adoption.

 Legislative Intent:- The rule assumes that lawmakers are aware of existing legal
principles and societal norms when drafting legislation. Therefore, the
interpretation of a statute should align with how it was understood by those who
enacted it.

25
 Sailesh Yadav

 Avoidance of Anachronistic Interpretations:- This rule discourages interpreting

statutes in a way that imposes contemporary perspectives on historical
legislation. Instead, it encourages an understanding of the law within the
framework of the time it was created.

Application Example: Suppose a law enacted in the 19th century contains terms that
may have had specific meanings or connotations during that period. Applying
contemporanea expositio, a court would look at how the terms were understood and
applied in the legal and societal context of the 19th century to determine their meaning.

Limitations and Considerations:

 The rule is not always applied rigidly, and courts may also consider how legal
principles have evolved over time.

 It is particularly relevant when dealing with older statutes where the historical
context is crucial to understanding the legislative intent.

In summary, contemporanea expositio directs interpreters to consider how a statute

was understood and applied at the time of its enactment, providing valuable insights
into the legislative intent and historical context surrounding the law.

vi. Construction of Words in Bonana Partem

This maxim means that words used in a statute are to be taken in their lawful
sense. Thus ‘ lawful ‘ means what is not prohibited by law ( legitimate ). It follows,
therefore, that words must be construed in their lawful sense .

Bonam partem operates on the presumption that legal provisions or terms should be
construed in a way that is fair to the accused or the party involved. It reflects the
principle of giving individuals the benefit of the doubt.

If there are two interpretations, legal and illegal, then this rule requires that, the
interpretation giving the words legal sense must be given effect. Any construction that
takes away the legality of the words of statute, must be avoided.

26
 Sailesh Yadav

Example : If Act refers, a thing to be done means it refers to the thing to be done
lawfully.

R. v. Hulme : Whenever the legislature under the Act requires a person to answer the
question, it means that he shall answer those questions truly and to the best of his
knowledge & belief.

Mehboob Basha v. Tamil Nadu Wakf Board: Words are prima facie to be taken in their
lawful and rightful sense. Where an Act for instance, gave a certain efficacy to a fine
levied on land, it referred only to a fine lawfully levied.

4. Hindu Law “Mimangsa”(Some Important Aspect)

The rules of interpretation in law are based on the intent of codified legislation,
considering the nature of transactions and situations. Interpretation is about
understanding the true meaning of written words as intended by the author. Maxwell is
a significant figure in this field.

In the past, other interpretation rules, especially those influenced by Hinduism in the
Eastern world, like the Mimangsa, were important. They provided rules for
understanding words and phrases in Hindu texts, even being applied to Smrities.

Jaimini, the author of Mimamsa Sutras, worked on systematizing these rules, focusing
on the practical aspects of dharma (righteous living). Dharma is defined as an
ordinance that leads to happiness, and failing to follow it can result in suffering.

While there's potential for using Mimangsa principles in interpreting statutes today, their
practical application remains limited. Nevertheless, efforts are being made to validate
and apply these rules in contemporary contexts.

The Mimangsa/Mimansa

"Mimangsa," also spelled as "Mimansa," is a crucial scripture in Hinduism, primarily

27
 Sailesh Yadav

used for interpreting other Hindu texts like the Vedas and Smrities. It focuses on the
serious consideration of religious matters within these scriptures. While various
scholars like Manu, Yagyabalkya, Narad, Vyas, and Bhrihaspati provided methods for
interpretation, none were as comprehensive as those presented by Jaimini in Mimangsa.

Originally designed for interpreting religious texts related to Yagya sacrifices, Mimansa
Principles gradually expanded to encompass legal texts, philosophy, grammar, and
more. Shankaracharya even used Mimansa principles in his commentary on Vedanta
sutras. Numerous Sanskrit books were written on this subject, although only a handful
have survived over time.

Mimangsa is divided into two parts: Eastern Mimansa (Purvi Mimangsa) by Jaimini,
which deals with interpreting Karmakandaparak Mantras and Vedas, and Northern
Mimansa (Uttar Mimansa or Vedanta), which explores the concept of eternity. Purvi
Mimangsa is the primary reference for interpretation.

Rule for interpretation under Mimangsa

The Rules of Interpretation under Mimangsa can be classified into following five
categories:

A. Primary Rules of Interpretation

The primary rules of interpretation is classified into following categories:

i. Sarthakya (साथ य)
It states that every word that is stated in the scriptures consists of meaning and there is
no world which is used there without meaning.

ii. Laghav (लागभ)

This rule indicates that in the case a single rule is generated from a particular text or
word, other interpretation giving different interpretation should not be resolved.

28
 Sailesh Yadav

iii. Arthekatwo (अथक व)

This rule signifies that the single word or the sentence used must be given single
meaning and should not be given different meanings.

iv. Gunapradhan (गुण धान)

It states that whenever a word denoting the secondary thought stands contrary to the
primary thought, the word should either be corrected as per the primary thought or
should be left.

v. Samanjasya (साम य)
It states that the possible coalition between the word and sentence of the particular text
should be used as per the spirit of the text itself. The contrary coalition of the words and
sentence should not be used.

vi. Bikalpa ( वक प)
It states that whenever there arises controversy between two texts exists, any one text
should be adopted as an alternative.

b. Basic Principles of Interpretation

The basic principles of interpretation also consists of following categories:

i. Shruti ( ु त)
It refers that the words should be taken in their simplest meaning.

ii. Wachan (वचन)

Wachan indicates that if there arises any conflict regarding the resolving meaning of the
word in terms of tense, the interpretation should be made looking at the tense used in
remaining texts or words. In this regard, Maxwell has also given similar kind of rule of
interpretation that the interpretation of particular text should be done in accordance to

29
 Sailesh Yadav

other texts as well. No interpretation of the tenses contrary to the Vedic Wachan is
permitted under Mimangsa. However, a general rule under this principle has been
propounded that says that the word denoting singular thing also denotes the plural
things.

iii. Linga ( लग)

This rule states that in the condition where a word cannot stand on its ordinary meaning,
then the technical meaning of that word should be resolved. For example, the word
denoting the masculine gender also refers to the feminine gender.

iv. Wakya (वा य)

This rule states that whenever a word or a sentence in the text does not give clear
meaning, then the composition of such sentence or word should be taken into concern
and the possible relevant meaning should be resolved.

v. Prakaran ( करण)
When the words or the sentence of text fails to give concrete meaning, the meaning of
those words of sentences should be resolved with the context of the text.

These general rules for applying texts are divided into four categories: First, there's the
principle of categorizing texts as compulsive, quasi-compulsive, or non-compulsive.
Within this, there are five groups: Kanoon/Bidhi defines law as positive commands with
a meaningful objective, Nisedh deals with mandatory laws that specify what should not
be done, Arthavadh and Naamdhaya are non-mandatory and aid interpretation, and
Mantra, sometimes mandatory, depends on the situation. Second, Adhikar Bidhi
determines to whom the law applies, addressing ownership of action results. Third, Uha
Bichar pertains to arguments, while fourth, Badh handles the exclusion of conflicting
elements, giving precedence to the latter in cases of conflicting procedures.

Applicability of Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation

30
 Sailesh Yadav

The Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation, originally designed for Hindu Scriptures, have
found relevance in modern legal contexts for two main reasons. First, they deal with
injunctions, and as much of the law consists of injunctions, there's a natural alignment.
Second, Mimansa is practical, much like law, which makes them compatible. Renowned
legal scholars like Vijnaneshwara, Jimutvahana, Nanda Pandit, Vachaspati, Neelkanth,
all experts in Mimansa, often applied these principles when interpreting Smrities, which
contained the law in their time.

In India, Mimangsa Rules of Interpretation have been used to explore the meaning of
legal provisions. The Supreme Court of India, in cases like UP Bhoodan Yagna Samiti v.
Braj Kishore, recognized the rich heritage of interpretation literature, including these
principles. Judges like Sir John Edge referred to Mimamsa principles in their judgments,
and specific Mimamsa principles, like the Gunapradhan Axiom, have been applied in
cases related to tax laws and other legal matters. The Supreme Court has affirmed the
value of these rules in various cases, highlighting their continued relevance in modern
legal interpretation.

Conclusion

Mimangsa principles of interpretation, although rooted in Hindu texts, can be a potent

tool for judges to shape laws to be more rational, equitable, and democratic. They offer
a flexibility lacking in Western interpretation methods. These principles align with some
aspects of modern legal interpretation. For instance, the Laghav and Shruti Principle
aligns with the Literal Rule, the Linga Principle resembles Section 12 of Nepal Kanoon
Byakhya Sambandhi Ain 2010, and the Vakya Rule is similar to the Mischief Rule. These
principles also distinguish between mandatory and non-mandatory rules.

Knowledge of Mimangsa principles can infuse equity and democratic spirit into the law,
as seen in cases like Mahavir Prasad Dwivedi v. State of U.P., where Mimansa principles
were applied to ensure a fair hearing. However, their implementation in Nepal remains
debated, with concerns about their incorporation into legislation due to their association
with Hindu religion and the potential conflict with economic principles. Nevertheless,
Mimangsa principles, developed around 500 B.C., were initially meant for religious texts
but gradually found use in legal interpretation, notably by jurists like Vijnaneshwara and
Jimutvahana. They offer a scientific basis for interpretation, and their application

31
 Sailesh Yadav

alongside other interpretation rules can enhance legal systems in countries influenced
by Hinduism, like India and Nepal.

5. Issues on Construction

a. Deeds and Wills

A deed is a legal document that conveys or transfers an interest or right in real property
(land or buildings) from one party to another. It is a formal and written instrument
signed, sealed, and delivered, often involving the exchange of consideration (value).
Deeds are commonly used in real estate transactions to transfer ownership, create
easements, or establish covenants.

A will, also known as a last will and testament, is a legal document that outlines an
individual's wishes regarding the distribution of their property and the care of their
dependents after their death. In a will, the testator (the person making the will) typically
appoints an executor to carry out their wishes.

The construction of deeds and wills involves interpreting the language used in these
legal documents to determine the parties' intentions and give effect to their wishes.
Here are key principles related to the construction of deeds and wills:

Construction of Deeds:

Plain Meaning:- Deeds are typically construed according to their plain and ordinary
meaning. The language used in the deed is given its natural and straightforward
interpretation.

Context and Surrounding Circumstances:- The context in which a deed is executed and
the surrounding circumstances may be considered to understand the parties' intentions.
This includes examining the purpose of the deed and any relevant background
information.

Technical Terms:- Technical terms and legal jargon in deeds are given their specialized
meanings unless the context suggests otherwise.

32
 Sailesh Yadav

Intention of the Parties:- The primary aim is to ascertain the intention of the parties
involved. If the language used is unclear, the court may look to the parties' intentions to
resolve any ambiguity.

Construction of Wills:

Testator's Intention:- The paramount consideration in construing a will is to discern the

testator's intention. The court seeks to give effect to the testator's wishes as expressed
in the will.

Literal and Technical Construction:- Wills are often construed literally, with words given
their ordinary meanings. Technical terms are interpreted according to established legal
principles.

Ambiguities:- If there are ambiguities in the language of the will, the court may consider
extrinsic evidence, such as the testator's circumstances and relationships, to clarify the
ambiguity.

Presumptions:- There are legal presumptions in will construction, such as the

presumption against intestacy (presuming the testator intended to dispose of their
entire estate) and the presumption against forfeiture (presuming the testator did not
intend to disinherit close relatives without clear expression).

b. Constitution

The construction of a constitution involves a holistic examination of its text, principles,

and overarching purposes. Courts play a crucial role in ensuring that constitutional
interpretation respects fundamental rights, maintains the constitutional structure, and
adapts to contemporary circumstances.

c. Negotiable Instrument, Premium etc.

Negotiable instruments are written documents that represent a promise to pay a

specific amount of money. Common examples include checks, promissory notes, and
bills of exchange.

The construction of negotiable instruments involves interpreting the language used to

33
 Sailesh Yadav

create a clear understanding of the parties' rights and obligations.

Premiums in insurance refer to the amount of money paid by the policyholder to the
insurance company for coverage. It is the cost of obtaining and maintaining an
insurance policy.

Construction involves interpreting the terms of the insurance policy to understand how
premiums are calculated, when they are due, and what factors may affect their amount.

d. Special Provision of an Act. e. International Treaties and Convention f. Trade &

Contracts and their terminology g. Restrictive Construction

h. Prevent Evasion or Abuse

i. Construction to Avoid Collusion with Other Provisions

The principle of construction to avoid collusion with other provisions, often referred to
as the rule against surplusage, is a fundamental concept in statutory interpretation. This
principle guides courts to interpret statutes in a way that avoids rendering any provision
superfluous or redundant within the legislative framework.

Key Points:

Presumption against Surplusage:- Courts presume that every word and provision in a
statute has a purpose. If an interpretation renders a provision meaningless or
unnecessary, it goes against the presumption against surplusage.

Harmonious Construction:- The rule encourages a harmonious construction of statutory

language, ensuring that all provisions work together cohesively and contribute to the
overall legislative scheme.

Giving Effect to Every Word:- Courts strive to give effect to every word and phrase in a
statute, avoiding interpretations that would nullify or ignore certain provisions.

Contextual Analysis:- Interpretation involves considering the entire statutory context,

legislative intent, and the purpose of the law to reconcile potential conflicts and give

34
 Sailesh Yadav

effect to all provisions.

Avoiding Absurd or Unreasonable Results:- Courts aim to interpret statutes in a way that
avoids absurd or unreasonable outcomes. If an interpretation leads to an illogical result,
it may be rejected in favor of an alternative construction.

j. Exceptional Construction:- It stands for the elimination of statutes and words in a

statute which defeats the real objective of the statute or makes no sense. ‘and’ ‘or’,
‘may’, ‘shall’, ‘must’."Exceptional construction" in the context of legal interpretation
generally refers to a situation where the ordinary rules of statutory or contractual
construction are set aside due to exceptional circumstances. This could involve
deviating from the usual interpretation principles to address a unique or extraordinary
situation.

k. Construction Rules identified in Statutes, International Agreements, Treaties.

6. Presumptions (Constitutionality of a Statute, Jurisdiction,

Retrospection Legislation, Violation of International Obligations)

The interpretation of statutes is guided by several presumptions that help maintain the
rule of law and ensure justice. These presumptions of statutory interpretation play a
crucial role in understanding the legislative intent behind the enactment of statutes.

1. Presumption of Constitutionality of a Statute:- Courts often presume that

legislatures intend to act within the bounds of the law and the constitution. Any
ambiguity in a statute is interpreted in a way that upholds its constitutionality and
legality.

Laws should adhere to constitutional boundaries, and when faced with multiple
interpretations, the one preserving constitutionality is preferred. Those challenging a
law's constitutionality bear the burden of demonstrating a violation. Courts assume the
validity of laws passed by competent bodies, but this presumption may be rebutted if a
law appears arbitrary or discriminatory. In cases of doubt, the benefit of the doubt leans
towards constitutionality, assuming legislative intention is expressed appropriately. The
rule of harmonious construction dictates that statutory language should be interpreted
to uphold constitutional validity, even extending to bylaws and constitutional

35
 Sailesh Yadav

amendments.

2. Interpretation That Takes Away Jurisdictions of Court Must Not Be

Enforced:- There is a presumption in statutory interpretation that, an interpretation of
a statute that restricts or takes away the jurisdiction of the courts should not be given
effect unless the words of the statute clearly and explicitly provide for it.

Case:

1. Bhagwan Das et.al. V. Chitwan District President Bhimbahadur Shrestha

In this case the supreme court held that,"According to the principle of administration of
law, the jurisdiction which a court or any quasi-judicial office has assumed, in
accordance with the law, any case shall not be transferred to another body unless
otherwise provided by law. If a body has acquired jurisdiction under the law and is given
to another body by a law that came into effect after that law, that other body can
assume jurisdiction only in cases filed after that law comes into force. Unless
otherwise arranged, it should be viewed from the previously filed agency." The
jurisdiction to view similar cases are also applied in a prospective manner. It cannot be
applied to a case that has already been filed with retroactive effect.

2. Inमसईहाजी मुसलमान व . क पलव तु ज.अ.का ज ला यायाधीश अं.लु बनी ज.अ.क पलव तु मौजे
पकडी ब ने वमत चमार etal.
"Even if the law is amended, it cannot be considered that the right of the court to hear
the case has ended unless there is a clear provision in that law."

3. Presumption against Retroactivity:- There is a general presumption that

statutes are not intended to have retroactive effects unless the legislature explicitly
states otherwise. This means that laws are presumed to apply only to future conduct
or events.

In the case of Gramma v. Veerupana, it was observed that Section 8 of “The Hindu
Succession Act, 1956” applies to the devolution of property of a Hindu male who dies
intestate. The Supreme Court ruled that the Act is not applicable to successions that
occurred before the Act came into operation, which means it has only prospective

36
 Sailesh Yadav

operation. In other words, the Act does not have retroactive effect on successions that
took place prior to 1956.

4. presumption against violation of international obligation

In legal interpretation, there exists a presumption against the violation of international

obligations by a sovereign state. This presumption reflects the principle that states,
when enacting laws, are presumed to act in accordance with their international
commitments.

States are presumed to legislate in a manner consistent with their international

obligations. This presumption aligns with the idea that states generally intend to abide
by the rules and treaties they have entered into on the international stage. Courts
generally interpret statutes to avoid conflict with international law, assuming that
legislatures do not intend to pass laws that breach the state's international obligations.
If a statutory provision is capable of multiple interpretations, courts may choose the
interpretation that aligns with the state's international commitments and obligations
under treaties.

In summary, the presumption against the violation of international obligations reflects

the idea that states, when crafting domestic laws, are presumed to respect and comply
with their international commitments. Courts strive to interpret statutes in a manner
that upholds these obligations, promoting consistency between domestic and
international legal frameworks.

7. Purposive Interpretation and H.L.A. Hart’s Penumbra and Ronald

Dworkin’s Hard Cases.

H.L.A. Hart's concept of "penumbra" in legal rules:

H.L.A. Hart's concept of "penumbra" refers to the gray area or boundary around of
legal rules where their application becomes unclear or ambiguous. Hart, a prominent
legal philosopher, introduced this idea in his work "The Concept of Law." He argued that
within the penumbra, there is room for judicial discretion and interpretation, as the strict
application of the law may not provide clear answers. The penumbra represents the
limits of legal rules and allows for flexibility in the law's application to accommodate
various situations and changing social norms.

37
 Sailesh Yadav

Imagine a legal rule as a clear line, like sunlight and shadow during an eclipse. The
"penumbra" is the fuzzy area in between where it's not clear how the rule applies. This
happens because language is vague, and rules can't cover every situation perfectly. So,
in these unclear cases, judges use their judgment, considering things like the rule's
purpose, the situation, and the consequences to decide how it should apply.

Hart's idea of the "penumbra" has been debated in legal philosophy. It's like asking how
much flexibility judges should have in interpreting and applying the law.

Q. Explain HLA Hart's concept of Penumbra.

H.L.A. Hart, a prominent legal philosopher, introduced the concept of "penumbra" as

part of his theory of legal positivism. This concept is particularly associated with his
work "The Concept of Law," published in 1961. The idea of penumbra plays a role in
understanding the boundaries and interpretation of legal rules.

Penumbra in Legal Positivism:

Definition:- The term "penumbra" refers to a zone of uncertainty or indeterminacy

surrounding a legal rule. According to Hart, legal rules are not always clear-cut
and may have areas where their application is not precisely defined.

Core and Penumbra:- Hart proposed a distinction between the "core" and the
"penumbra" of legal rules. The core represents the clear and uncontroversial
applications of a rule, while the penumbra encompasses areas where the
application is less certain and subject to interpretation.

Examples:- In the context of rights, for example, the core might include the
fundamental and clearly defined rights like freedom of speech. The penumbra
could extend to more ambiguous situations where the boundaries of such rights
are not well-defined, leading to questions about their application.

An example of this in the U.S. is the Roe v. Wade case, where the Supreme Court
had to decide if a woman's right to abortion was protected by the Constitution,
even though it wasn't explicitly mentioned. This required interpreting the
Constitution's values, which is a bit like navigating the "penumbra" of the law.

38
 Sailesh Yadav

Judicial Discretion:- Hart's concept of penumbra recognizes that legal rules may
not cover every possible scenario. In these situations, judges may need to
exercise discretion in interpreting and applying the law. The penumbra allows for
a degree of flexibility in the law's application.

In summary, H.L.A. Hart's concept of penumbra reflects the acknowledgment that legal
rules are not always precise and that there are areas of uncertainty or indeterminacy.
The penumbra allows for a certain degree of flexibility and discretionary interpretation
by judges when faced with situations not clearly covered by existing legal rules.

Q. How does HLA Hart justify the judicial discretion in the penumbral case?

H.L.A. Hart, a prominent legal philosopher, justifies judicial discretion in penumbral cases
through his concept of "open texture" and the "rule of recognition" in his theory of legal
positivism. Hart justifies judicial discretion in penumbral cases as an inherent aspect of legal
systems, acknowledging the limitations and uncertainties within the law. His justification is
rooted in his legal positivist philosophy, and he argues for the necessity of judicial discretion in
interpreting and applying legal rules in certain indeterminate situations.

1. Open Texture (vagueness of law): Hart argued that legal rules are often framed with open-
textured language, which leaves room for interpretation and discretion. In penumbral cases,
where the law is unclear or ambiguous, judges have the authority to apply these open-textured
rules in a manner that aligns with the principles and values underlying the legal system. This
allows judges to adapt the law to evolving societal norms and changing circumstances.

2. Rule of Recognition: According to Hart, every legal system has a "rule of recognition" that
serves as the ultimate criterion for identifying valid laws within that system. This rule specifies
the criteria for what constitutes a valid legal rule. In penumbral cases, when existing rules or
precedents are insufficient, judges rely on this rule of recognition to exercise their discretion in
crafting new legal principles or making decisions that are consistent with the legal system's
fundamental principles.

In summary, H.L.A. Hart justifies judicial discretion in penumbral cases as a pragmatic response
to the inherent indeterminacy within legal rules. He argues that the open texture of legal
language, changes in societal values, and the need for flexibility necessitate the exercise of
discretion by judges to interpret and apply the law in a manner consistent with legal principles
and the legislator's intent. Hart's justification for judicial discretion in penumbral cases
acknowledges the inherent flexibility in legal systems and the need for judges to fill gaps or

39
 Sailesh Yadav

resolve ambiguities when traditional legal rules do not provide clear guidance. This discretion,
he argues, helps maintain the legitimacy and adaptability of the legal system.

Ronald Dworkin's Hard Cases

Ronald Dworkin's concept of "hard cases" in legal philosophy refers to situations

where the law doesn't provide a clear answer, and judges must rely on their moral and
ethical judgment to make a decision.

Here's a simplified explanation:

Imagine a legal case where existing laws and precedents don't offer a straightforward
solution. These are what Dworkin calls "hard cases."

In these situations, judges can't simply apply existing rules; they have to dig deeper and
consider broader principles and moral values.

Dworkin argues that law is not just a set of rules but a system built on principles and
values. So, in hard cases, judges should strive to make decisions that align with the
underlying principles and moral values of the legal system.

This concept challenges the idea that judges should only interpret and apply existing
laws without considering their personal views. Dworkin's approach emphasizes the
importance of moral reasoning in the judicial process.

8. General Introduction of The Kanoon Byakhya Ain,2010

Key Features:

1) Enactment and Authority:- Enacted in Magh 2010 B.S. Promulgated by His Majesty
through state power and Royal Privileges.

40
 Sailesh Yadav

2) Preamble and Purpose:- Preamble states it was promulgated to provide a reliable

definition of legal words and phrases in Nepal, acting as a Lexicon for Legal
Terminologies.

3) Comprehensive Framework:- Aims to provide a consistent framework for interpreting

laws in Nepal.

4) Technicality and Significance:- Widely studied and analyzed by lawyers, judges, and legal
professionals due to its technicality and fundamental framework.

5) Assistance to Legal Entities:- Assisted the Pradhan Nyayalaya and complemented the
Interim Government of Nepal Act 2007 during its period of promulgation.

6) Definition of Legal Terminologies:- Features clear definitions of legal terminologies.

7) Prevention of Absurd Interpretations:- Aims to prevent absurd interpretations and

promotes legal harmony with contradictory statutes.

8) Impact on New and Old Laws:- Specifies the effect of repeal, ensuring that rights,
obligations, or penalties under old laws remain unchanged.

9) Revival of Repealed Laws:- Outlines conditions for reviving repealed laws, requiring a
clear statement of purpose and connection in the new law.

10) References to Repealed Laws:- Provides for references to repealed laws, indicating that
references to specific sections will be to the new version.

11) Treatment of Time:- Introduces the use of "From" and "To" in legislation.

Clarifies that if "From" is used, it excludes the first day, and if "To" is used, it includes the
last day.

41
 Sailesh Yadav

12) Allows time postponement when legal processes coincide with closed court or office
days.

13) Limitation of Law:- Specifies conditions under which a reasonable law is limited,
particularly in cases involving taxes, liabilities, and burdens on the Government of Nepal.

14) Legal Powers:- Clarifies that when legislation allows a public authority or individual
power, it can be exercised as often as required.

15) Gender and Number Interpretation:- Provides that words referring to males also include
females. States that the singular form of a word comprises plural forms and vice versa.

16) Penalty Provisions:- Allows authorities to impose penalties of lesser magnitude than
provisioned in the Act.

17) Subordinate Application:- Defines the application of laws to public offices, including
deputies and other public servants subordinate to the head or chief of the public office.

18) Alignment with International Standards:- Introduced changes in the Nepalese Legal
System to align with international legal standards.

19) Increased Compliance:- Increased compliance with international standards of law and
legislation.

20) Addressing Exceptional Conditions:- Addresses exceptional conditions that arise during
the application and interpretation of legislation.

21) Promotion of Legal Interpretation Principles:- Propagates the fundamental elements of

Legal Interpretation in Nepal.

42
 Sailesh Yadav

22) Analysis and Critique:- Analyzed as complementing a complete replacement of the Sui-
Generis Laws of Nepal in favor of International Legal Standards.

23) Liberal Interpretation Limitation:- The Act limits the scope of a potentially sui-generis
Legal System of Nepal and undermines the liberal interpretation of Nepalese Laws.

In summary, the Interpretation of Laws Act 2010 encompasses various provisions aimed at
ensuring clarity, preventing absurd interpretations, and harmonizing legal principles in Nepal. It
plays a crucial role in the legal landscape of the country, influencing both judicial decisions and
legislative processes.

9. Principles of Drafting(Acts, and Regulations)

Jeremy Bentham, an influential English philosopher and legal theorist from the 18th and
19th centuries, significantly contributed to the development of the modern theory of
legislative drafting. His work laid the foundation for principles that have since become
integral to the art and science of drafting statutes.

i. Clarity and Certainty:- Bentham emphasized the importance of clarity in legal

language. He argued that laws should be expressed in clear and straightforward
terms to ensure that individuals can understand and follow them. This principle is
reflected in the modern call for statutes to be clear and certain to avoid
confusion.

ii. Avoidance of Ambiguity:- Bentham advocated for the avoidance of ambiguity in

legal language. He believed that precise and unambiguous language was
essential to prevent different interpretations and misunderstandings. Modern
drafting principles similarly stress the importance of clarity and the avoidance of
ambiguity in statutes.

iii. Utilitarian Principles:- Bentham was a proponent of utilitarianism, which

emphasizes maximizing overall happiness or utility. In the context of legislative
drafting, this translates into creating laws that contribute to the greatest
happiness of the greatest number. Modern legislative drafting often considers
the broader societal impact and welfare.

iv. Practical Utility:- Bentham argued that laws should serve a practical purpose and
be designed to achieve specific social goals. This aligns with the modern

43
 Sailesh Yadav

principle of ensuring that statutes are not only legally sound but also practically
effective in addressing societal issues.

v. Public Accessibility:- Bentham advocated for laws to be easily accessible to the

public. He believed that individuals should be able to understand the law without
the need for specialized legal knowledge. Today, this principle aligns with the
emphasis on making legal texts accessible to the general public.

vi. Economic Efficiency:- Bentham's utilitarian approach also included

considerations of economic efficiency. This principle is reflected in modern
legislative drafting by promoting laws that achieve their objectives in a cost-
effective and efficient manner.

vii. Systematic Arrangement:- Bentham argued for a systematic arrangement of

laws to enhance their coherence and facilitate understanding. Modern drafting
principles often stress the importance of organizing statutes logically and
systematically.

While Bentham's direct influence on legislative drafting may not be as explicitly

acknowledged today, his ideas have left an enduring impact. The principles he
advocated for laid the groundwork for modern theories of legislative drafting,
emphasizing clarity, certainty, utilitarian considerations, and practical utility in the
creation of effective and accessible statutes.

Q.1. "Courts can declare the law, they can interpret the law, they can
remove the obvious lacunae and fill the gaps but they cannot entrench
upon in the field of legislation properly meant for the legislature". critically
examine the above statement and clearly explain the purpose that various
rules of interpretation of statutes are intended to serve.

Ans:- The statement highlights the delicate balance between the roles of the judiciary
and the legislature in the legal system. Let's break down the components and examine
them critically.

Courts' Role in Declaration and Interpretation:

44
 Sailesh Yadav

Courts are empowered to interpret laws and make judgments based on their
understanding of statutes.

Declarations by courts can clarify legal ambiguities and provide guidance on the
application of laws.

Limitations on Judicial Authority:

The statement emphasizes that while courts interpret and clarify laws, they should not
encroach upon the legislative domain.

Courts cannot create new laws but can only fill gaps or resolve ambiguities within the
existing legal framework.

Legislative Exclusivity:

The phrase "properly meant for the legislature" underscores the notion that certain
matters are exclusively within the domain of the legislature.

Matters requiring policy decisions, significant legal reforms, or the creation of entirely
new laws fall under the purview of the legislature.

Purpose of Rules of Interpretation:

Literal Rule: Advocates strict adherence to the literal meaning of the words in the
statute. It ensures predictability but may lead to unjust outcomes in certain cases.

Golden Rule: Allows courts to depart from the literal meaning when it leads to absurd
results. This rule helps prevent unintended consequences.

Mischief Rule: Focuses on identifying the problem or "mischief" that the statute aims to
address and interpreting it in a way that aligns with the legislative intent.

45
 Sailesh Yadav

Purposive Approach: Courts consider the overall purpose of the statute and its
objectives, allowing for a broader interpretation that aligns with legislative intent.

Ejusdem Generis: When a general term follows specific terms in a list, it is interpreted to
include only items of the same kind. This rule aids in determining the scope of general
terms.

Noscitur a Sociis: Words are known by the company they keep. This rule involves
interpreting unclear words in light of surrounding words, ensuring coherence in meaning.

In essence, the rules of interpretation aim to reconcile ambiguities, uphold legislative

intent, and ensure justice while respecting the separation of powers. They guide courts
in striking the right balance between interpreting laws and respecting the exclusive
legislative role in certain matters.

2. Explain about golden rule of interpretation. How far is this rule different
from the literal rule?

The Golden Rule of interpretation is a legal principle used by courts to interpret statutes.
It allows the court to depart from the literal meaning of the words in a statute if
adhering to that literal meaning would lead to absurd or unreasonable results. In other
words, the Golden Rule provides flexibility to interpret the law in a manner that avoids
absurd outcomes while still staying within the overall intent of the legislation.

The literal rule follows the concept of interpreting the natural meaning of the words
used in the statute. But if interpreting natural meaning leads to any sought of
repugnance, absurdity or hardship, then the court must modify the meaning to the
extent of injustice or absurdity caused and no further to prevent the consequence.

Key aspects of the Golden Rule:

46
 Sailesh Yadav

Avoiding Absurdity: The primary purpose of the Golden Rule is to prevent the law from
leading to unreasonable or absurd consequences. If a strict literal interpretation would
produce such outcomes, the court may modify the interpretation.

Balancing Literal Meaning and Common Sense: While the literal rule requires adherence
to the plain language of the statute, the Golden Rule allows for a more common-sense
approach. It permits the court to look beyond the literal wording to achieve a reasonable
result.

Differences Between Golden Rule and Literal Rule of Interpretation:

Approach to Literal Meaning:

Literal Rule: Strict adherence to the plain and ordinary meaning of the words in a statute, without
considering potential absurdities.

Golden Rule: Allows departure from the literal meaning if adhering to it would lead to absurd or
unreasonable outcomes.

Handling Absurdity:

Literal Rule: Does not provide a mechanism for dealing with absurd or unjust consequences
resulting from a literal interpretation.

Golden Rule: Specifically addresses situations where a strict literal interpretation would lead to
absurdity and permits modification of the interpretation.

Focus on Legislative Intent:

Literal Rule: Primarily concerned with the literal meaning of the words, with less emphasis on
the broader legislative intent.

Golden Rule: Considers the overall purpose and intent of the legislation, allowing for a more
flexible interpretation to align with legislative objectives.

47
 Sailesh Yadav

Extent of Departure from Literal Meaning:

Literal Rule: Strictly confines interpretation to the literal wording of the statute.

Golden Rule: Permits departure from literal meaning only to the extent necessary to avoid
absurdity, maintaining a connection with the statute's purpose.

Resolution of Ambiguity:

Literal Rule: May struggle when faced with ambiguous language in a statute.

Golden Rule: Addresses ambiguity by considering practical implications and choosing an

interpretation that avoids absurd results.

Use of Common Sense:

Literal Rule: Relies solely on the literal meaning, regardless of common sense or practical
consequences.

Golden Rule: Incorporates a common-sense approach, allowing the court to consider the
reasonableness of outcomes.

Application to Different Cases:

Literal Rule: Generally applicable unless it leads to absurdity, but does not provide a systematic
way to handle such situations.

Golden Rule: Specifically invoked when adherence to the literal meaning would produce absurd
results, offering a solution for addressing these cases.

These differences highlight how the Literal Rule and Golden Rule represent contrasting
approaches to statutory interpretation, with the Golden Rule providing a more flexible and
pragmatic framework in certain circumstances.

In summary, the Golden Rule allows for a more pragmatic and commonsense approach to
statutory interpretation. It acknowledges that strict adherence to the literal meaning might not
always align with the legislative intent, especially when literal interpretation leads to
unreasonable or absurd results. The Golden Rule strikes a balance by allowing the court to
modify the interpretation to achieve a more sensible outcome while still respecting the overall
purpose of the statute.

48
 Sailesh Yadav

Q. Discuss and illustrate the Haydon's rule as applied to the interpretation

of statutes to find out the mischief rule.

Haydon's rule is a principle used in the interpretation of statutes, particularly in the

context of the mischief rule. The mischief rule is one of the three primary rules of
statutory interpretation used by courts to understand the legislative intent behind a
statute. It aims to determine what problem or "mischief" the statute was meant to
address and interpret it accordingly.

Haydon's rule, also known as the Rule in Haydon's Case, is a specific aspect of the
mischief rule. It involves considering the historical context and purpose behind the
enactment of a statute to determine the legislative intent.

Here are the key steps involved in applying Heydon's rule:

i. What was the law before the making of the Act?

This involves examining the legal landscape and understanding the state of the law
prior to the enactment of the statute in question.

ii. What was the mischief and defect for which the law did not provide?

Identify the problem or "mischief" that the legislature aimed to address by passing the
statute. This requires looking at the shortcomings or gaps in the existing legal
framework.

iii. What remedy has Parliament resolved and appointed to cure the disease of the
commonwealth?

Determine the specific remedy or solution that the legislature has prescribed in the
statute to address the identified mischief.

49
 Sailesh Yadav

iv. The true reason of the remedy.

Understand the underlying purpose or rationale behind the chosen remedy to ensure
that the interpretation aligns with the overall objective of the legislation.

Illustrative Example:- Suppose there's a statute aimed at regulating online financial

transactions to prevent fraudulent activities. Applying Heydon's rule:

a. Law before the Act: Review the legal landscape regarding online financial
transactions, understanding how transactions were regulated (or not) before the
new statute.

b. Mischief and Defect: Identify the mischief, such as a lack of effective regulations
leading to increased online financial fraud.

c. Remedy by Parliament: Examine the provisions of the statute that introduce new
regulations, penalties, and oversight mechanisms to combat online financial
fraud.

d. True Reason of the Remedy: Understand the legislative intent behind the specific
provisions, ensuring that the interpretation aligns with the broader goal of
reducing fraudulent activities in online financial transactions.

By following these steps, the court can interpret the statute in a way that addresses the
identified mischief and achieves the legislative purpose behind its enactment.

Q. Discuss the Principles of drafting for a good statutes.

Creating effective and clear statutes is crucial for the proper functioning of the legal
system. Here are some principles of drafting for good statutes:

i. Clarity and Simplicity:- Use plain and straightforward language to ensure that the
statute is easily understood by those it affects, including the general public and

50
 Sailesh Yadav

legal professionals.

ii. Consistency:- Maintain consistency in language and terminology throughout the

statute to avoid confusion or ambiguity.

iii. Precision:- Clearly define terms and concepts to minimize the risk of
misinterpretation. Precision helps in providing a solid legal foundation for the
statute.

iv. Comprehensive Coverage:- Address all relevant issues and contingencies within
the scope of the statute to avoid loopholes or gaps in the law.

v. Logical Structure:- Organize the content in a logical and coherent manner. A well-
structured statute enhances readability and facilitates understanding.

vi. Avoidance of Redundancy:- Eliminate unnecessary repetition or redundancy in

language. Each provision should contribute to the overall purpose of the statute.

vii. Flexibility:- Draft statutes with a degree of flexibility to accommodate future

changes or developments without requiring frequent amendments.

viii. Fairness and Equity:- Ensure that the statute promotes fairness and equity,
treating individuals or groups similarly in comparable situations.

ix. Accessibility:- Make the statute easily accessible to the public through clear
publication and dissemination methods.

x. Consideration of Enforcement:- Draft provisions with a realistic understanding of

how they will be enforced, taking into account available resources and practical
considerations.

xi. Legal Certainty:- Aim for legal certainty by avoiding vague or ambiguous
language. Uncertain statutes can lead to disputes and challenges.

xii. Harmonization with Existing Laws:- Ensure that the new statute harmonizes with
existing laws, maintaining coherence within the legal framework.

xiii. Public Consultation:- When possible, involve stakeholders and the public in the
drafting process to gather diverse perspectives and insights.

xiv. Technical Details:- Address technical details and nuances relevant to the subject
matter, providing clarity for those who will implement and enforce the statute.

By adhering to these principles, drafters can contribute to the creation of statutes that

51
 Sailesh Yadav

are effective, fair, and capable of achieving their intended purpose.

Q. Why the Literal rule is considered as the most important and safe rule
for interpretation of statutes? Discuss the drawbacks of the application of
literal rule of interpretation of statutes.

The Literal rule is often considered important because it prioritizes the plain and
ordinary meaning of the words in a statute. This approach aims to uphold the intention
of the legislature as expressed through the language used in the law. It is seen as a safe
rule as it minimizes judicial discretion, providing clarity and predictability in statutory
interpretation.

Advantages of the Literal Rule:

i. Certainty and Predictability:- The Literal Rule provides a clear and straightforward
approach, emphasizing the plain and ordinary meaning of statutory language.
This promotes legal certainty and predictability, as it focuses on the words' literal
interpretation.

ii. Respect for Legislative Intent:- The Literal Rule is seen as a way of respecting the
legislature's intent by adhering strictly to the words chosen by lawmakers. It
assumes that the legislature expresses its intent through the language it uses.

iii. Minimization of Judicial Activism:- Adhering to the literal meaning reduces the
potential for judges to inject personal opinions or subjective interpretations into
the law. This minimizes judicial activism and promotes a more restrained role for
the judiciary.

iv. Preservation of Separation of Powers:- The Literal Rule maintains a clear

separation of powers by limiting the judiciary's role to interpreting and applying
the law, leaving lawmaking to the legislature. This separation is crucial for the
proper functioning of a democratic system.

Drawbacks of the Literal Rule:

52
 Sailesh Yadav

i. Absurd Outcomes:- One major drawback is that strict adherence to the literal
meaning may lead to absurd or unjust results in certain cases. This is particularly
true when the literal interpretation goes against the underlying purpose or
intention of the law.

ii. Failure to Address Ambiguity:- The Literal Rule may struggle with ambiguous
language or situations where multiple interpretations are possible. It does not
provide a systematic method for resolving ambiguities in the statute.

iii. Rigidity in Application:- The Literal Rule is often criticized for its inflexibility,
especially when the literal meaning does not align with the practical realities or
evolving societal norms. It may hinder the law's ability to adapt to changing
circumstances.

iv. Ignoring Legislative Purpose:- Strictly adhering to the literal meaning might result
in overlooking the broader purpose or policy behind the law. This can undermine
the effectiveness of legislation in achieving its intended goals.

v. Lack of Contextual Consideration:- The Literal Rule does not give sufficient
weight to the contextual nuances and surrounding circumstances that may affect
the interpretation of statutory language. This can lead to overly simplistic
interpretations.

vi. Inability to Address Legislative Oversight:- If a statute contains drafting errors or

oversights, the Literal Rule does not provide a mechanism to correct or address
these issues. Courts are limited to interpreting the words as they appear.

vii. Conflict with Legislative Intent:- In cases where the literal meaning goes against
the overall legislative intent, strict adherence to the Literal Rule may result in an
interpretation that defeats the purpose of the law.

In conclusion, while the Literal Rule offers clarity and predictability, its application can
be problematic when faced with ambiguity, absurdity, or conflicts with legislative intent.
Many legal systems recognize the limitations of strict literalism and often employ other
rules of interpretation, such as the Golden or Mischief rules, to address these
shortcomings.

What do you mean by interpretation of statutes? In what instances court

may use the exceptional construction. Discuss with suitable examples.

Interpretation of Statutes:- Interpretation of statutes refers to the process of

53
 Sailesh Yadav

understanding and explaining the meaning of legislative enactments or laws. It involves

analyzing the language used in a statute, considering its context, and determining the
legislative intent behind the words. The goal is to give effect to the purpose of the law
and ensure just and consistent application.

Rule of exceptional construction:- Exceptional construction in legal interpretation refers to

an approach where a court departs from the ordinary or literal meaning of statutory language to
address specific circumstances or anomalies. This form of interpretation is invoked when strict
adherence to the usual meaning of the words would lead to unjust or absurd results, or when it
is clear that the legislature did not intend the ordinary meaning to apply in certain exceptional
situations.

It stands for the elimination words in a statute which defeats the real objective of the statute or
makes no sense. ‘and’ ‘or’, ‘may’, ‘shall’, ‘must’.

Instances:

Absurdity or Injustice:- When applying the literal meaning of statutory language would result in
an absurd or unjust outcome, courts may resort to exceptional construction. The aim is to
prevent the law from leading to results that are clearly contrary to reason or fairness.

Legislative Oversight or Drafting Error:- If it becomes apparent that the legislature made an
oversight or drafting error, and the literal interpretation would produce unintended
consequences, courts may use exceptional construction to correct the error and give effect to
the intended purpose.

Avoidance of Constitutional Issues:- If applying the literal meaning of a statute would raise
constitutional concerns or result in a violation of constitutional rights, courts may use
exceptional construction to interpret the law in a manner that avoids constitutional conflicts.

International Law Considerations:- Courts may resort to exceptional construction to ensure that
statutes are interpreted in harmony with international law obligations. If a literal interpretation
would lead to a violation of international agreements or principles, courts may deviate from the
ordinary meaning.

Ambiguity in Legislative Intent:- When there is ambiguity in legislative intent, and the literal

54
 Sailesh Yadav

interpretation does not clearly align with the overall purpose of the statute, courts may use
exceptional construction to discern and give effect to the broader legislative intent.

In each instance, the decision to use exceptional construction is guided by a careful analysis of
the specific circumstances, legislative intent, and the broader principles of justice. Courts aim to
interpret statutes in a manner that is equitable, reasonable, and aligned with the overall goals of
the legal system.

Exceptional construction can take various forms, and its application depends on the specific
circumstances and goals of statutory interpretation.

Here's how exceptional construction is applied in the mentioned contexts:

(i) Modification of Language to Meet Intention:

Scenario- :A statute's literal language might not fully capture the legislative intent due to drafting
errors or oversights.

Application:- Courts may modify or adjust the language of the statute to better align with the
intended purpose. This involves interpreting words or phrases in a way that reflects the
underlying legislative goal, even if it requires a departure from the strict literal meaning.

(ii) Equitable Construction:

Scenario:- When applying the literal meaning of a statute would lead to unfair or inequitable
results.

Application:- Courts may adopt an equitable construction, seeking a fair and just outcome. This
involves interpreting the law in a manner that promotes justice and aligns with equitable
principles. It allows courts to mitigate harsh consequences and achieve a more balanced result.

(iii) Strict Construction of Penal Laws:

Scenario:- Penal laws are often subject to strict construction to ensure that individuals are not
unfairly penalized.

Application:- Exceptional construction in the context of penal laws involves interpreting criminal
statutes narrowly. Courts may require clear and unambiguous language to establish criminal

55
 Sailesh Yadav

liability, ensuring that individuals are not convicted for conduct that the legislature did not
clearly prohibit.

(iv) Statutes Encroaching Rights or Imposing Burdens:

Scenario:- When a statute appears to encroach upon fundamental rights or imposes significant
burdens on individuals.

Application:- Courts may apply exceptional construction to safeguard constitutional rights. This
involves interpreting the statute narrowly to minimize its impact on rights or imposing additional
requirements on the government to justify any infringement. The goal is to protect individual
liberties and ensure that legislative actions adhere to constitutional boundaries.

In all these contexts, the application of exceptional construction requires a careful analysis of
legislative intent, the broader purpose of the law, and the need to avoid unjust, absurd, or
unintended outcomes. Courts balance the imperative to uphold the rule of law with the
recognition that rigid adherence to the literal meaning may not always serve the interests of
justice or the intended legislative purpose. The goal is to achieve a reasonable and just
interpretation that is faithful to the overall objectives of the legal system.

56