meaning, purpose and scope of interpretation of statutes

The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of

the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.
"The essence of law lies in the spirit, not its letter, for the letter is
significant only as. being the external manifestation of the intention
that underlies it" - Salmond.

Interpretation
The word ‘Interpretation’ is derived from the Latin term ‘interpretari’ which
means to explain or expound or to understand or translate. Interpretation is a
process through which one arrives at the true and correct intention of the law-
making body which is laid in the form of statutes. This helps in finding out the
intention of the author.

Interpretation of any data generally means to analyze the available data and
come out with an opinion which is certain and clear. This increases the ability of
an individual to understand and explain it in his/her own way. This helps to find
out the ways to understand and analyse the statute, where it leads the
interpreter to the whole new meaning which is completely different from the
general meaning.

It is necessary for all law students, lawyers, judges and anyone who belongs to
the legal fraternity to know how to interpret the statute whenever a legislative
house comes up with the new statute or an amendment because they will be
dealing with these legislations on day to day basis. The main intention of
analyzing is to know the new changes which are being brought due to the
legislation and the impacts of that legislation in society.

Usually, the interpretation of the statute is done by the judges, it is the primary
function of the judge as a judicial head. As we all know that our government is
divided into three important wings which are: Legislature, Executive and
Judiciary. Here legislature lays down the law and intends people to act
according to the legislature and the judiciary that is judges will come up with
the proper meaning of the law and puts the law into operation. This helps in
maintaining checks and balances between the wings.
Need for interpretation
1. The ambiguity of the words used in the statute: Sometimes there will
be words that have more than one meaning. And it may not be clear
which meaning has to be used. There could be multiple interpretations
made out of it.
2. Change in the environment: We all know that society changes from
time to time and there may be new developments happening in a
society that is not taken into consideration, this lacks the predictability
of the future event.
3. Complexities of the statutes: usually statutes are complex and huge, it
contains complicated words, jargon and some technical terms which
are not easy to understand and this complexity may lead to confusion.
4. When legislation doesn’t cover a specific area: Every time when
legislations are out it doesn’t cover all the area it leaves some grey
areas and interpretation helps in bridging the gaps between.
5. Drafting error: The draft may be made without sufficient knowledge of
the subject. It may also happen due to the lack of necessary words and
correct grammar. This makes the draft unclear and creates ambiguity
in the legislature.
6. Incomplete rules: There are few implied rules and regulations and
some implied powers and privileges which are not mentioned in the
statute and when these are not defined properly in the statute this
leads to ambiguity.

Rules of interpretation of statutes

Strict Interpretation
Strict interpretation means each word in the statute should be interpreted by
the letter and not with respect to the spirit behind the statute. A judge has to
apply the text only as it is written in the statute when there is clear meaning of
the text there will be no scope for any further investigation regarding the same.
Here in strict interpretation, the courts will use the literal rule of interpretation.

This method is important because judges will not make any wrong inferences
from statutes and will not go out from the letter of the law and the judgment
will be purely based on the text of the statute. This upholds the rule of law by
giving importance to the legislature that passes the laws.
If we take the example when we are dealing with the taxation provisions we can
not vary from the letter of law as it is universally applicable to all the people in
the nation. It is applied as per the text in order to fix the standard in society
and clear all the uncertainties which may arise in the near future.

State of Jharkhand v. Ambay Cements, 2005

In this case, it was held that the provisions of the law should be strictly
constructed, it should not be let open for the court to interpret, the court cannot
ignore the conditions prescribed in the provision. Wherever there is a
mandatory rule it must be strictly followed, when a statute explicitly mentions
the performance of a particular act in a specific way and lays down the
consequences to it, that should be mandatorily followed. Cardinal rule of
interpretation is that when a particular act should be done in a prescribed
manner the courts cannot interpret that in any way of performance.[1]

Liberal Interpretation
Liberal or beneficial interpretation means the interpretation of the statute
should be made liberally in order to get a wider and enhanced meaning to it.
Here judges have all the powers and authority to interpret the laws according to
the case requirements and in this rule, there will be no compulsion to follow
only the letter of the law, they can go beyond the meaning of the text and
interpret. The courts will use the golden rule of interpretation or the Mischief
rule of interpretation.

In this method, the judge does not restrict themselves to the literal meaning of
the law but they will give all the opportunity to the lawyers to enlighten them
with the different interpretations of the law. They will try looking at the law
from the other perspective, by which many of the modern-day problems would
be solved. As it is an exhaustive rule of interpretation it gives a wider scope of
expanding the law and helps in creating a new law if required.

If we take the example of the ‘CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT’, the main aim of
that act is to protect the interest of the people. All the laws are established for
the public interest it cannot be looked in a narrow way by restricting it into the
letter of law.

Madan Singh v. UOI, 1999

In this case, it was held that it is the duty of the court to interpret the
provisions of the law, as every case will not be having the same situation, and
the court should interpret especially when there are beneficial provisions related
to the parties. The interpretation as to be made in the liberal sense so as to get
a wider meaning and understanding of the word rather than restricting the
meaning which would probably negate the whole case. And this would destroy
the complete purpose of the law which is to protect the public interest. [2]

Literal Rule
The literal rule basically looks into what the law says, not what the law means.
It considers the original meaning of the word. Here judges cannot come up with
the words and interpret according to the case basis. When the language used is
simple and the words have only one meaning to it at that time judges will use
this literal rule of interpretation.

When there are no two meanings to a word. This rule helps courts from taking
sides in legislative or political issues. If any word in the statute has a special
meaning to it, usually it will be mentioned in the interpretation clause, all
technical words are given ordinary meaning if the statute has not specified it.
Usage of the appropriate words is very important and makes a lot of difference
in the meaning of the context.

Courts should never go beyond the intention of the legislators. When the words
of the statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous, then there is no
need of explaining that in the natural or ordinary sense.

R v. Harriss, 1836

The defendant bit off the victim’s nose. The statute says it is offence ‘to stab cut
or wound’ a person. Here the court applied the literal rule, the act of biting did
not come within the meaning of stab cut or wound as these words implied an
instrument had to be used. Therefore the defendant’s conviction was quashed.
[3]

Fisher v. Bell, 1960

Under the ‘offensive weapons act of 1959’, it is an offence to offer certain

offensive weapons for sale. Bristol shopkeeper, James Bell displayed a flick knife
in his shop window. When brought to trial it was concluded that Bell could not
be convicted given the literal meaning of the statute. The law of contract states
that having an item in a window is not the intention of sale but is an invitation
to treat. Given the literal meaning of this statute, Bell could not be convicted.

Pritipal Singh V. Union Of India

There was the criminal case was against the defendant, the charge sheet was
filed as per the violations and provisions under the ‘Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985’ and the interpretation of words was in
question. The court emphasized the literal rule of interpretation.

It was held that there is a presumption that the words which are used in the
statutes are correct and exact and it is inappropriately made.[4]

Criticism
 Judges started giving more importance to the literal meaning of the
statutory provisions without considering the wider meaning of the
context.
 This method ignores the limitations of the language.
 Words undergo changes in their meaning as time passes.
 Basing it on a wrong assumption that a word has only one fixed
meaning.
 Lack of clarity in the statute.
 This leads us to prejudices and determines the meaning of the statute.

Reasonable Construction
Reasonable construction follows the principle of ‘Ut Res Magis Valeat Quam
Pareat’ which means when the interpretation of the statute is made it should be
done in a meaningful and sensible manner. If a statute is having a two
interpretation where one is completely vague and absurd and other is perfectly
making sense then that meaningful interpretation should be used.

A provision of law cannot be so interpreted where it is made without using

common sense. Every word or expression used in an act should receive its
natural and fair meaning which was made in accordance with the legislator.

Tirath Singh v. Bachittar Singh

It is only when the language of a statute, in its ordinary meaning and
grammatical construction, leads to a manifest contradiction of the apparent
purpose of the enactment, or to some inconvenience or absurdity, hardship of
injustice, presumably not intended, a construction may be put upon it which
modifies the meaning of the words and even the structure of the sentence.[5]

Kanwar Singh v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1965

Courts can depart from the dictionary meaning of a word and give it a meaning
which will advance the remedy and suppress the mischief provided the Court
does not have to conjecture or surmise. Construction will be adopted in
accordance with the policy and object of the statute.[6]

Golden Rule
The Golden rule is also called as British rule of interpretation, it is a form of
statutory interpretation which allows a judge to depart from a normal meaning
of the word in order to avoid an absurd result. As we know applying the bare
letter of law sometimes may lead us to confusion and gives us an absurd result,
in order to overcome these kinds of results judges will give an opportunity to
the lawyer to come up with the new interpretation to the law which will be more
certain and accurate to the case.

This method of interpretation is also known as the compromise method between

literal rule and the mischief rule. In the literal rule, judges will only use the
word meaning nothing else, but sometimes this may be irrational and gives us
unexpected results which will be unlikely to the legislator’s intention.

In the case of homographs, where a word can have more than one meaning,
the judge can choose the meaning which is suitable at that particular case if the
word only has only one meaning, but applying that would lead to a bad decision
where the judge can apply that decision and arrive at a completely different
meaning.

This rule is used in two main situations:

1. When the meaning of the word is too narrow.

2. When the word itself has ambiguity or absurdity.
For example:
 1. Whenever you stand near the lift it will be written that ‘’Do not use lifts
in case of fire.’’ if you consider it in a literal meaning you should never
use the lifts, this would be an absurd result because the intention of
the person who put the sign is to prevent using of lift when there is live
fire burning anywhere near the lift.
2. When a son murdered his mother and committed suicide, now the
court has to decide who will inherit the property is its mother’s family
or the son’s descendants. The judgment came out in favour of the
mother’s family, here what we have observed here is son never had
the intention of making a profit by his crime, but now this judgment
will be binding on all the lower courts.
R v. Allen, 1872

The defendant was charged with an offence of bigamy under section 57 of

‘offence against person act 1861’. The statutes states “whomsoever being
married shall marry any other person during the lifetime of husband and wife is
guilty of an offence.”

Under the literal rule of interpretation of this section, the offence would be
impossible to commit since the civil law will not recognize a second marriage as
an attempt to marry in such circumstances would not be recognized as a valid
marriage.

Court applied the golden rule and held that the word marriage should be
interpreted as ‘to go through a marriage ceremony.’ The defendant was
convicted and held guilty.[7]

Adler v George case, 1964

Under section 3 of the ‘official secrets act,1920’ it was an offence to obstruct

HM Forces in the vicinity of a prohibited area. Adler was arrested for obstructing
forces whilst in a prohibited area. Under The Literal Rule, Adler was not in the
vicinity of the area, he was in the area and so was not infringing the terms of
the act. The Golden Rule was applied to extend the meaning of ‘vicinity’ and
avoid the possible absurd outcome.

Uttar Pradesh Bhoodan Yagna Samiti v. Brij Kishore

The Supreme Court held that the expression “landless person” used in Section
14 of the ‘U.P. Bhoodan Yagna Act, 1953,’ which made provision for grant of
land to landless persons, was limited to “landless labourers”. Landless labour is
he who is engaged in agriculture but having no agricultural land.
The Court further said that “any landless person” did not include a landless
businessman residing in a city. The object of the Act was to implement the
Bhoodan movement, which aimed at the distribution of land to landless
labourers who were verged in agriculture. A businessman, though landless
cannot claim the benefit of Act.[8]

Criticism
 This infringes the separation of power among the wings of the
government that is between judiciary and legislature.
 Here judges can technically change the law by changing the meaning
of the words in the statute.
 This method can be used only when there is an absurdity in the
statute.

Mischief Rule
The mischief rule is a kind of statutory interpretation where it attempts to
determine the intention of the legislators. It basically originated in the 16th
century by the Heydon’s case in the united kingdom, the main objective of this
is to find out the mischief and defect of the previous statute which was in
question and how the new statute will come up with the remedy that resolves
the defect.

The main purpose of bringing the amendments in the statute is to add on

additional areas or to make certain changes in the existing law and make it
wider where it covers many other circumstances. Legislating a new law is to
resolve the problem which was unable to resolve through the other laws which
were existing before. And this also helps in finding out the answers to those
questions which were not answered in the previous law. So here we can observe
the retrospective effect in the process of making laws.

This rule is also called as purposive construction as there is a purpose behind

making this ruling. Here court attempts to know the intention of the legislators
for bringing in the change in the law. It also tries to analyze the mischief and
the defect which was present in the previous law which leads to the creation of
the new law.
Heydon’s Case
This case helps us to know the 4 important points which we have to keep in
mind while statute interpretation.

1. What was the common law before the making of the act?
2. What was the mischief or defect which the common law did not
provide?
3. What remedy the Parliament had resolved by appointing to cure the
disease of the commonwealth?
4. What is the true reason behind the remedy?[9]
Thomas v. Lord Clan Morris

Here it was stated that interpretation of any statutory enactment should not
only restrict them to the interpretation of words and phrases used, but they
should also look at the history of the act and the reasons behind passing such
acts.

Bengal immunity co. V. State of Bihar, 1955

In this case, they have applied the mischief rule in the construction of Article
286 of the constitution of India. Article 286 was in question because before the
implementation of this section every state had its own powers and privileges to
make its own laws regarding taxation. But the supreme court said that article
286 is made in order to regulate the interstate taxation system and to maintain
a well-organized taxation system. And make the whole of India as one economic
unit.

Here Supreme Court has looked into the history of article 286 and also the
reasoning behind it by considering both of it they have interpreted the statute
by mischief rule.[10]

Elliot V. Grey, 1960

According to the Road Traffic Act of 1930 uninsured cars are not allowed to be
driven or parked on the road. The defendant’s car was parked on the road near
the public place but he was not using it.

The defendant was held guilty because the parliament has passed a bill which
states that people should insure their car only then they can drive the car.
The mischief rule was applied by the court by stating that the car being used in
the road if in case the car causes an accident, insurance would be required. The
reason behind this was that people should be compensated when they are
injured by such incidents and danger caused to them by others.

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

Disadvantages:
 It is considered as an outdated rule as it came into the picture in the
16th century.
 Gives excess power to the judiciary who are unelected and it is
considered undemocratic.
 This makes the law uncertain.
 In the 16th century, the kings used to give judiciary complete power to
draft laws so at that time they were well qualified about the mischief
acts.

Harmonious Construction
This rule of interpretation is adopted when there is a conflict between two or
more statutes or between two provisions of the same statute. Every law has a
certain purpose set, so judges should take those purposes into consideration
and it should be read as a whole while interpreting. Judges should apply such
provisions which are in accordance with the public interest. The laws which are
applied must be consistent and shouldn’t overlap with other existing laws. The
courts should avoid using such laws which bring ambiguity to the subject and
makes courts inconsistent.

Sometimes it’s impossible to harmonise between two provisions of the statute

at that time the decision of the judges will prevail above everything. When there
is “a head-on clash” between the provisions of law the judges should bring
harmony and make justice to both the parties.
Supreme Court explained harmonious rule as to when the two provisions of the
same legislation are inconsistent with each other, both the provisions must be
interpreted in such a way where it gives equal importance to others. Here one
provision will not override on other provision, it aims at harmonizing between
conflicting provisions and avoids destruction one provision.

Supreme Court has laid down five principles of rule of Harmonious

Construction in the landmark case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers:

1. The courts should avoid such provisions which are contradicting in

nature and which brings the head-on clash between each other.
2. The courts should interpret in such a way that brings harmony to the
contradicting provisions.
3. The provision of one section cannot defeat the other provision.
4. When the court fails to bring harmony to both parties, it should at least
interpret in such a manner where both the provisions are given effect
as much as possible.
5. Courts should keep in mind that the interpretation which reduces one
provision to the dead is not harmonious, here harmonising doesn’t
mean destroying.[11]

Ejusdem Generis
Ejusdem Generis means of the same kind. Generally, the words should be given
their natural meaning, unless it requires special meaning based on that context.
When general words follow specific words that are distinct in nature, the general
words should also be given the specific meaning to it.

The courts will interpret such general words follow specific words in a restricted
way. It will be based on the facts and circumstances of the case which may
change case to case. The legislative intent on principle of Ejusdem Generis is if
the general words to be used in the restricted sense that means those words
will be having a special meaning to it or else why would they even use specific
words.

For example in an act dealing with the slaughter of animals for food for human
consumption, the expressions used are “cows, goats, sheep, and other
animals”.

Whether the following animals are cover:

 1. Cats and dogs
2. Poultry
3. Wild animals
4. Horseflesh
Regina v. Edmundson, 1859

It was stated by Lord Campbell “Where there were general words following
particular and specific words, the general words must be confined to things of
the same kind as those specified.” by applying this it helps judges to restrict the
wide ambit of the general expression.

In this case, it gave us the basic requirements which should be present in the
case in order to apply ejusdem generis:

1. The statue should contain an enumeration of specific words.

2. The general term should follow the specific term.
3. There should be no different intent of the legislature to the general
terms.
4. The series of the enumeration should constitute a class or category.
5. The class or category should not be exhausted by the enumeration of
specific words.

Beneficial Construction
The general rule of the statute is that if a word used in the statute excludes
certain cases in its common meaning, it should not be forced unnecessarily to
include those cases. An exception to this rule is that when the main objective of
the statute is not achieved by excluding those cases then the word may be
interpreted on the basis of the case requires.

This rule of interpretation will benefit individuals. Whenever there is an

ambiguity or when the which would take the benefit away from the individual,
so the meaning which prevails over the benefit to the individuals should be
adopted.

The courts should be generous towards the persons to whom benefits are
conferred by the statute. Here it involves the judges to give the widest meaning
to the statute in order to protect the interest of the parties, if you look into
certain statutes the main purpose is to benefit and protect the interest of the
person, for example, Industrial Disputes Act, Consumer Protection Act, Juvenile
Justice Act and all labour-related laws. Provision is capable of giving two
meanings where one would preserve the benefit and another.

Hindustan Level Ltd v Ashok Vishnu Kate

In this case, the court held that in a case which is related to the prevention of
unfair labour practices it should be made completely in accordance with the
labour point of view as they are benefitting people here and while interpreting
Social Welfare Legislation also they should consider the benefitting people of the
society.[12]

Noor Saba Khatoon v. Mohammad Quasium

The supreme court held that the rights of maintenance of children below two
years old and the mother under Section 125 of the code of civil procedure 1973
are independent of each other and any other and subsequent legislature
regarding maintenance of children below two year and mother that maybe
Muslim women (Protection of rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 could not affect the
same in absence of clear provision to the effect.[13]

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

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

The days have passed by when judges used to use only strict rule where they
interpret the law only based on the meaning of the words used in the statute,
but now court seeks to give effect to the purposive rule where it not only
consider the words of the statute according to their meaning but also according
to the context. ‘Context’ here doesn’t mean only ‘linguistic context’, it takes into
consideration the subject-matter, scope, purpose, and background of the act.

Important features:

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

In this case, there were five students who were immigrants came to London for
the purpose of studies. They challenged the refusal to allow them grants for
their education.

The court held that the House construed the expression ‘ordinarily resident’ in
the 1962 and 1980 Acts. Long-standing authority on the meaning of the
expression was referred to. The natural and ordinary meaning of ordinary
residence had been settled by two tax cases. At least for educational purposes,
‘ordinary residence’ did not include a person whose residence in a particular
place or country was unlawful.[14]

Other Rules

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius

It is a Latin phrase that says ‘Express Mention and Implied Exclusion’ that
means express mention of one thing excludes all other things. Here it is
considered that the items which are not on the list are not covered by the
statute. When something is expressly mentioned in the statute it leads to the
presumption that the things which are not specified in the statute are excluded.

General words in a statute must receive a general construction unless the

statute is specifying any special meaning to the general words. Whenever
something is added in the statute it is added with the due consciousness. It is
assumed that if something is not added in the statute there is a reason behind
it, which is to exclude that from the particular statute.

Contemporanea Expositio Est Optima Et Fortissima in Lege

It is one of the best and the strongest way of interpretation. As time passes by
words used in the statute will undergo changes in their meaning but when it is
interpreted the word should bear its original and same meaning as the statute
intended when it was passed.

The meaning of the law should be interpreted in the context when the law was
formulated. Old statutes must be interpreted in such a way where that defines
its purpose of introducing it. And it also considers the prior usage and interest
or of enforcing the act at the time when the law was enacted.

If the word is wrongly interpreted for all these years those kinds of words will
not be eligible for interpretation. The words can only be interpreted by the court
when the title of the property may be affected or when everyday transactions
have been affected.

Noscitur a Soclis
Noscitur a soclis is a Latin term which means associated words, the meaning of
unclear words or phrases is to be determined or interpreted on the basis of its
context and the words and phrases surrounding it.

Associated words try to explain the meaning of the general words and also limit
the interpretation of specific or special terms. When a word used in a statute is
ambiguous or vague, the meaning of such words will be determined by looking
associated words around it. These surrounded associate words will give clear
and specific meaning to it.

The importance of this rule is it aims to interpret by reading the whole statute.
It doesn’t emphasize one particular word but it tends to interpret the word by
looking into its preceding and succeeding words. The words are understood in a
cognitive sense and the intention of the legislatures can be easily understood.
Aids in Interpretation
Interpretation is the process of finding out the true essence of the enactment,
by giving natural and ordinary meaning to the words of enactment. This helps in
ascertaining the true meaning of the words used in a statute.

The main objective of the interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention

of the legislature where the meanings of the words are expressly or impliedly
mentioned. Courts sometimes interpret the statute In an arbitrary manner, so
in order to overcome all these confusions, certain principles have evolved out of
the continuous exercise by the courts. These principles are called ‘Rules of
Interpretation’.

Rules of interpretation act as a tool in determining the meaning of the particular

act which is mainly divided into two they are:

1. External Aid: the external evidence derived from extraneous

circumstances, such as previous legislation and decided cases, etc.
2. Internal Ais: the internal evidence derived from the Act itself.

Internal Aids
Judges while interpreting a statute takes many things into consideration.
Determining the primary meaning of the statutory words. And where there is
ambiguity in the meaning of the words in the statute. Answers to the many
questions of ambiguity will be there in the statute itself. Those are called
‘Internal Aids’.

Title of the Statute

1. Long title
Every statute starts with the long title, it gives the description of the object of
that Act.

For example, the long title of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is – “An Act to
consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil
Judicature”.
The long title is used by the court to interpret certain provisions of the statute.
It helps in removing the ambiguity and confusion of the act and not in giving
conclusive aid in interpreting the provisions of the statute.

Manohar Lal v. State of Punjab

The long title of the Act is relied upon as a guide to decide the scope of the Act.

2. Short Title
Usually, the short title is used for the purpose of referring and identification of
any Act. it ends with the year of the passing of the Act. This is one of the
important part of the statute but its role in interpretation is very minimum.

For example, Section 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, says –“This Act
may be cited as the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It shall come into force on
the first day of January 1909.”

3. Preamble
The main aim and objective of the act is found in the preamble of the statute.
All the Acts starts with the preamble, stating the reasons behind the enactment
of the act and the main objective of the act.

For example, the Preamble of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is “Whereas it is
expedient to provide a general Penal Code for India; it is enacted as follows”.

Kashi Prasad v. State

The court held that even though the preamble cannot be used to defeat the
enacting clause of a statute, it can be treated as a key for the interpretation of
the statute.

4. Heading and Title of a chapter

Heading gives the key to the interpretation of the clauses under it and helps to
know what the intent of the provision. Headings might be treated as the
preamble to the provision.

Durga Thathera v. Narain Thathera and Anr

The court held that the headings are like a preamble which helps as a key to the
mind of the legislature but does not control the substantive section of the
enactment.
 5. Marginal Notes
Marginal notes are inserted at the side of the section and help to understand the
effect of the section. This cannot be used for interpretation of the section.

Wilkes v. Goodwin

It was held that the side notes are not part of the Act and hence marginal notes
cannot be referred.

6. Definitional/Interpretation Clauses
Definition clause is used to define all the important terms and to avoid the
necessity of frequent repetitions in describing the same subject matter to which
the word or expression defined is intended to apply.

Definition clause of one particular Act is applied only on the particular Act, not
on any other Acts.

7. Illustrations
Illustrations are the examples given in the statutes for a better understanding
of the section.

Mahesh Chandra Sharma v. Raj Kumari Sharma

It was held that illustrations are parts of the Section and help to elucidate the
principles of the section.

8. Proviso
Proviso provides examples of specific cases. These specific examples are given
to such cases where general words require special meaning for it.

 ‘Exception’ is intended to restrain the enacting clause to particular

cases.
 ‘Proviso’ is used to remove the special cases of the general enactment
and give them special recognition.
 ‘Saving Clause’ is used to protect the destruction of certain rights,
privileges and remedies already existing.

9. Explanations
Explanations are added to the section to explain and elaborate on the meaning
of the words in the section. The purpose behind this explanation is to explain,
clarify, subtract or include something by elaboration. This forms an important
part while interpreting the laws.

10. Schedules
The schedule forms an important part of the statute. This should be read along
with the section. It contains minute details which adds information to the
provisions of the enactment. The expressions of the schedule cannot override
the meaning of the provision.

11. Punctuation
Punctuation is one of the minor element of the statue. It should be given
importance only when there is proper punctuation used and when there is no
doubt about its meaning.

External Aids
When internal aids that are preamble, explanation, illustrations, etc are
inadequate for the purpose of interpretation, Judges may take external aids into
consideration. When the words of the Act are clear and unambiguous, the
external aids are not required.

1. Historical Background
This includes the original idea of drafting such an Act. The reason behind
enacting such laws the cases which influenced the parliamentarians to bring out
such laws. It also includes the debates made during passing the laws. And the
first-hand hand information collected while making the laws.

2. Reference to Reports of Committees

The reports made by the various committees during the enactment of the
legislation can be referred as it gives more clarity to the words and also helps
us to understand the intention behind the act, by this, we can figure out what
was the defect or mischief which was present in the previous law.

When parliament passes the enactment based on the committee report and
there is any confusion or ambiguity in the terms of the statute that can be
easily clarified by referring that committee reports and it helps in the
interpretation of the statute very efficiently.

Rosy and another v. State of Kerala and others

The Supreme Court Considered Law Commission of India, 41st Report for
interpretation of section 200 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

3. Judicial Decisions (Precedents)

Every enactment made by the parliament is based on some or other case, so by
referring to the previously giving judgments by the higher courts helps us to
analyse and form laws. These judgements may be Indian judgements or foreign
judgements. Foreign decisions can be taken into consideration when other
countries also follow the same system of jurisprudence. But the priority should
be given to the Indian judgements.

4. Dictionary
When the meaning of the word is not clear in the statute, the meaning of those
words can be figured by looking into the dictionary. And there are certain words
which have a different legal definition and common English definition, so
whenever we are looking for the legal meaning of any word it is good to search
that in the black dictionary.

5. Social, Political and Economical and Scientific Developments

When the statute is being interpreted it should consider the present system in
society. It should take into consideration the changes in the situations and
circumstances which have occurred after the implementation of any act. And
most importantly the changes in the social conditions and the scientific changes
in terms of technology should be given at most importance. When court starts
doing this kind of interpretation this helps the legislature to bring out the new
amendments for the statute.

6. Other materials
Courts can also refer to the books, journals, papers, articles which are published
by the eminent scholars who are expert in that field.

Conclusion
The article covers all most all the tools of interpretation, by following these
interpretations one can understand and analyse the statute in a better way. This
also helps legal fraternity to analyse newly enacted laws by the parliament and
to find out the pros and cons of it. It is an extensive article covering most of the
relevant topics, for further information you can refer bibliography.