Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Interpretation of statutes internal aids
Typology: Study notes
1 / 11
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Traditionally, all the writers on interpretation of statutes consider the preamble, title, heading, marginal notes, punctuation, illustrations, definitions, proviso,
explanation etc. as internal aids. By a long catena of decisions, it is now well settled that preamble is not a part of enactment. It is a recital to the intent of the
legislature as it enumerates the mischiefs to be remedied. Though it is considered as a key to the construction of the statute, whenever the enacting part is open to
doubt, it cannot restrict or extend the enacting part when the latter is free from doubt. However, in India, it is well settled in the field of constitutional law that the preamble to the Constitution of India and Directive Principles of State Policy are
the guidelines for interpreting the constitutional provisions. We will deal with this a little while later. But there is nothing wrong for Courts to refer to the preamble as well as the title of the Act in construing the statute to know the intention of the
legislature. Whenever there is a reasonable doubt about the provisions in the statute, it is permissible to refer to the heading of the provision for interpreting the section. Insofar as marginal notes inserted in the legislation itself are concerned,
they are also treated as guidelines for interpreting the statutes. In many statutes, especially, penal statutes, enacted in the olden times, it is the practice of the legislature to give illustrations. The illustrations cannot be used either to cut down
or extend the scope of the section.
It is now settled that Long Title of an Act is a part of the Act and is admissible as an aid to its construction. The long title which often precedes the preamble must be distinguished with the short title; the former taken along with the preamble or even in its absence is a good guide regarding the
more comprehensively than the long title. It may recite the ground and cause of making the statute, the evils sought to be remedied or the doubts which may be intended to be settled. In the words of SIR JOHN NICHOLL : “It is to the preamble more specifically that we are to look for the reason or spirit of every statute, rehearsing this, as it ordinarily does, the evils sought to be remedied, or the doubts purported to be removed by the statute, and so evidencing, in the best and most satisfactory manner, the object or intention of the Legislature in making or passing the statute itself. The principle has also been enunciated by the Supreme Court, where MUDHOLKAR, J., speaking for the court observed: “It is one of the cardinal principles of construction that where the language of an Act is clear, the preamble may be resorted to explain it. Again, where very general language is used in an enactment which, it is clear must be intended to have a limited application, the preamble may be used to indicate to what particular instances, the enactment is intended to apply. We cannot, therefore, start with the preamble for construing the provisions of an Act, though we could be justified in resorting to it, nay, we will be required to do so, if we find that the language used by Parliament is ambiguous or is too general though in point of fact parliament intended that it should have a limited application.
A preamble retrospectively inserted into an earlier Act is not of much assistance for gathering the intention of the original Act. Similarly, it seems the repeal of a preamble simpliciter will not affect the construction of the Statute.
The Preamble of the Constitution like the Preamble of any statute furnishes the key to open the mind of the makers of the Constitution more so because the Constituent Assembly took great pains in formulating it so that it may reflect the essential features and basic objectives of the Constitution. The Preamble is a part of the Constitution.The Preamble embodies the fundamentals underlining the structure of the Constitution. It was adopted by the Constituent Assembly after the entire Constitution has been adopted. The true functions of the Preamble is to expound the nature and extend and application of the powers actually confirmed by the Constitution and not substantially to create them. The Constitution, including the Preamble, must be read as a whole and in case of doubt interpreted consistent with its basic structure to promote the great objectives stated in the preamble. But the Preamble can neither be regarded as the source of any substantive power nor as a source of any prohibition or limitation. The Preamble of a Constitution Amendment Act can be used to understand the object of the amendment. The majority judgments in Keshavanand and Minerva Mills strongly relied upon the Preamble in reaching the conclusion that the power of amendment conferred by Article 368 was limited and did not enable Parliament to alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution
The view is now settled that the Headings or Titles prefixed to sections or group of sections can be referred to in construing an Act of the Legislature. But conflicting opinions have been expressed on the question as to what weight should be attached to the headings. “A
‘Punctuation’ means to mark with points and to make points with usual. It is the art of dividing sentences by point or mark. Is the Court entitled to use punctuation also while interpreting the statutes? Punctuation is considered as a minor element in the construction of statutes. Text book writers comment that English Court pay little or no attention to punctuation while interpreting while interpreting the statutes. The same is not the cases in Indian Courts. If a statute in question is found to be carefully punctuated, punctuation may be resorted for the purpose of construction.
In Mohd. Shabbir v. State of Maharashtra, while interpreting Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, the Supreme Court pointed out that the presence of ‘comma’ after ‘manufactures for sale’ and ‘sells’, and absence of any ‘comma’ after ‘stocks’ would indicate that only stocking for sale could amount to offence and that mere stocking cannot be treated as an offence for the purpose of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. Another important internal aid is the schedule or schedules appended to a statute. It forms part of the statute and it can be interpreted independently as well as with the aids of interpretation of statutory provision.
Illustrations appended to a section from part of the statute and although forming no part of the section, are of relevance and value in the construction of the text of the section and they should not be readily rejected as repugnant to the section. It would be the very last resort of construction to make this
assumption. The great usefulness of the Illustrations which have, although not part of the sections, been expressly furnished by the Legislature as helpful in the working and application of the statute, should not be thus impaired. Similarly in interpreting section 113 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 and in deciding that 'later' bequest to be valid must comprise of all the testator's remaining interest, if the legatee to the later bequest is not in existence at the time of testator's death, and that a conferment of a life estate under such a bequest is not valid, the Privy Council took the aid of Illustrations appended to that section. VISCOUNT MAUGHAM pointed out: "Illustrations 2 and 3 would seem to show - What is not clear from the language of the section - that however complete may the disposition of the will, gift after the prior bequest may not be a life interest to an unborn person for that would be a bequest to a person not in existence at the time of testator's death of something less than the remaining interest of the testator.
These do not take away the ordinary and natural meaning of the words, but as used: (i) to extend the meaning of a word to include or cover something, which would not normally be covered or included; and (ii) to interpret ambiguous words and words which are not plain or clear. The definition must ordinarily determine the application of the word or phrase defined; but the definition itself must first be interpreted before it is applied. When the definition of a word gives it an extended meaning, the word is not to be interpreted by its extended meaning every time it is
part, the proviso will not prevail over the absolute terms of a later Act directed to be read as supplemental to the earlier one. However, where the. section is doubtful, a proviso may be used as a guide to its interpretation; but when it is clear, a proviso cannot imply the existence of words of which there is no trace in the section.
The object of an Explanation is to understand the Act in the light of the Explanation. The object of an Explanation to a statutory provision is- (a) to explanation the meaning and intendment of the Act itself, (b) where there is any obscurity or vagueness in the main enactment, to clarify the same so as to make it consistent with the dominant object which it seems to subserve, (c) to provide an additional support to the dominant object of the Act in order to make it meaningful and purposeful, (d) an Explanation cannot in any way interfere with or change the enactment or any part thereof but where some gap is left which is relevant for the purpose of the Explanation, in order to suppress the mischief and advance the object of the Act it can help or assist the court in interpreting the true purport and intendment of the enactment, and (e) it cannot, however, take away a statutory right with which any person under a statute has been clothed or set at naught the working of an Act by becoming an hindrance in the interpretation of the same.
It does not ordinarily enlarge the scope of the original section which it explains, but only makes the meaning clear beyond dispute.
A section sometimes begins with the phrase ‘notwithstanding anything contained etc.’ Such a clause is called a non obstante clause and its general purpose is to give the provision contained in the non obstante clause an overriding effect in the event of a conflict between it and the rest of the section. Thus, there is generally a close relation between the non obstante clause and the main section and in case of ambiguity the non obstante clause may throw light on the scope and ambit of the rest of the section. If, however, the enacting part is clear and unambiguous, its scope cannot be whittled down by the use of the non obstante clause.
