Interpretation

Interpretation is derived from the Latin word “interpretari” which means

“to explain, translate, understand or expound”. The source of the word
makes it pretty apparent that interpretation is the process of determining
the true meaning of the words used in a statute or as a matter of fact, any
document or piece of text. Interpretation of any data means to analyse
the available data. It is possible that the same thing may mean differently
in different circumstances. The use of words or punctuation can make a lot
of difference in one’s understanding of it. For illustration, “Let’s eat,
Grandma” and “Let’s eat Grandma” mean altogether different things. The
same is also possible in the context of legislation. To clarify this position,
Interpretation as a skill is employed such that the true meaning of the
used words is discovered. When we talk about the interpretation of
statutes, we are concerned with the correct understanding of law in the
interest of Justice, Equity and Good conscience and with the ultimate
legislative goal in mind. Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High courts,
in various instances, have played the role of interpreter of statutes
wherein a completely new meaning was given to an existing piece of
legislation or a grey area of law was clarified in order to maintain
uniformity. In the case of Madan Singh Shekhawat vs. Union of India[1],
the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that it is the duty of the courts to
interpret the provisions of the law. It is pertinent for any individual from
the legal fraternity, a law student, advocates, lawyers, judges or for
instance, anyone, should know how to interpret a statute as the legislation
is primely dealt with by lawyers. An advocate has to make written
submissions before a court of law, and the contents of such submissions
depend upon the interpretation of the law and the meaning that the
concerned advocate or attorney gives it. Primarily, it is the duty of judges
to interpret the law in such a manner that the ultimate intention behind
introducing that legislation is fulfilled. One should note that each and
every piece of legislation that is introduced in a country is with a motive
to either regulate or prohibit human actions or inactions. There is a
problem that needs a solution which is introduced in the form of
legislation. For example, the Indian Contract Act was introduced in order
to clarify the contractual position between two parties and resolve
disputes, if any, between the two parties.

NEED OF INTERPRETATION

 Use of ambiguous language in statutes – It is possible that a

law or a legal text may often contain vague or ambiguous language
that requires interpretation. Sometimes, the words used in
legislation may have one or more meanings which can create
 confusion for the public to understand. Interpretation can help to
clarify the same which ultimately avoids ambiguity and doubts.
However, when the law is clear, there is no need for interpretation.
In the case of R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay[3], It was held that “It was
stated that when the language of statutes is evident and lacks any
ambiguity, it is the foremost responsibility of the courts to enforce
the intended meaning of the words used in the provision as they
naturally appear”.
 Incorporating societal changes – Sometimes, for the greater
good and in the interest of justice, it is important for judges to either
read out a provision of law or to give it a new meaning such that
society can accept and be in consonance with that particular law.
The most prominent example of this is the recent developments in
sex work. In 1964, a famous social activist named Gangubai
Harjeevandas, also known as Gangubai Kathaiwadi met Prime
Minister Jawaharlal Nehru to discuss the plight and conditions of sex
workers in India[5], but no significant steps were taken in that
direction. However, as society evolved and many new things
developed among the public, the Hon’ble Supreme Court recently
recognized ‘Prostitution’ as a profession. This is indicative of the
evolving mind-set and nature of our society and legislation needs to
keep up with society too. Interpretation serves as a tool to make
legislation competent as per the evolving needs and challenges of
society.
 Use of complex language in statutes – Often, legislation is a
long and bulky document that are difficult to understand. They
include jargon, technical phrases, language used in the legal
fraternity and difficult-to-understand vocabulary which can be a
cause of confusion, and sometimes conflict too. Interpretation of
statutes can clarify this position and help consistency to be
maintained. For example, several provisions of the infamous
Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation)
Act, The Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement of Price
Assurance and Farm Services Act and The Essential Commodities
(Amendment) Act as passed in 2020 were misinterpreted by various
farmers and farmer union which led to widespread protest and
ultimately, the act was repealed. This was a demonstration of the
fact that misunderstandings about a particular act or legislation can
cause upheaval.
 Filling the grey areas of law – Legislations are intended to solve
a complex societal problem covering all aspects to the greatest
extent possible. However, it is not humanly possible for any law to
cover facets of a problem and no matter the attempt, there will
 always be grey areas of law where the action or consequences or
the procedure is not clear. People often try to find loopholes in laws
to achieve their personal motives. It is in these areas where the
interpretation serves as an illuminating factor and fills in these areas
which clarifies the legal position.
 Drafting error – It is a very well-known fact that no human is
perfect and since legislation and laws are also designed and made
by humans, they cannot be perfect. Sometimes, a draft (bill) of an
Act can be prepared by a person who doesn’t possess enough
technical knowledge about the subject matter. For instance, a
medical practitioner is in a better position than a person employed
in the financial sector to draft laws for the medical
fraternity.Sometimes, lack of proper usage of grammatical in
technical terms or incorrect usage of the same leads to ambiguity in
the ultimate act. Interpretation serves as a tool to fix these drafting
errors and to make sure that the legislation and laws are correct and
error-free.
 Incomplete rules – It is possible that legislation has several
provisions which are implicit laws, norms and privileges that are not
explicitly mentioned either deliberately or as a matter of mistake
which creates uncertainty and ambiguity. Interpretation helps to
clarify and discover these implicit laws such that no injustice is done
towards anyone.

Construction

Construction involves the explanation and application of the law. It means

adapting the words of statutes to situations while finding a way to apply
the law in cases. By implementing construction, courts decide how to
apply the law in practice to resolve disputes, protect rights, and ensure
justice. According to Salmond, “interpretation and construction is the
process by which the court seeks to ascertain the meaning of the
legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is
expressed.” According to Cooley, “construction is the process of
concluding, respecting subjects that lie beyond the direct expression of
the text, which is in the spirit though not within the letter of law”.

The distinction between interpretation and construction mainly lies in their

scope and emphasis. Interpretation primarily serves the purpose of being
able to understand and reveal intent, whereas construction involves the
act of applying that intent to situations. Interpretation provides guidelines
so construction is done inside those boundaries and courts can apply the
law consistently and fairly. In practice, interpretation and construction
tend to be closely connected. The court’s interpretation of a statute will
influence the construction of its judgments in the cases. For this reason,
we can also assume safely that the results of the case laws will be
considered during the construction of future statutes.

Construction is the process of translating the semantics of a legal text into

legal rules. In law, construction relates to the process of legal explanation
that makes sense of difficult and hard terms written in statutes and gives
a conclusion based on logic and reasoning. A court extracts findings after
scrutinising the meaning of the words used in the text. The intent behind
the construction is to determine the legal effect of the legal text. The
basic rule of construction is to read the text, laws or statutes literally.

For example, in a situation that involves a contract, interpretation defines

whether any term in the contract, be it the meaning or definition of a term
or the intent that parties had when entering the said contract, means.
Construction, on the other hand, applies the contract to the facts involved
with a particular dispute, like whether a breach of contract is involved and
what damages should result.

Similarly, in the case of a statute, interpretation provides what words have

been used to say how broad the given provision is or what the legislation’s
intent behind enacting the given statute. In contrast, construction involves
how the statute can be applied to the facts of a particular case, such as
whether a certain activity falls within the scope of the statute and what
penalties are to be imposed.

Case Laws Illustrating The Difference

Heydon’s Case (1584)

Here, the rule of interpretation, which is narrow as compared to the literal

and the golden rules of interpretation, provides judges with more
discretion to decide than the other two rules, and it is therefore regarded
as the third rule of statutory construction. The word generally “mischief”
refers to loss or damage caused to a person or property. The development
of a remedy for the flaw in the statute is what is mainly aimed for through
this rule.

Marbury v. Madison

In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court interpreted and construed the U.S.
Constitution. Chief Justice John Marshall interpreted the language of the
Constitution to make the claim for the power of judicial review on behalf of
the court. He also applied principles of construction to work out how that
power was to be exercised in practice and shaped the role of the judiciary
in American law.
Differences Between Interpretation And Construction

1.Purpose

-The interpretation process primarily focuses on determining the precise

meaning of the words used in a legal text. This involves the discovery of
the true intent or meaning as expressed behind the use of the words by
scrutinizing the plain and literal meaning, canons of interpretation,
legislative history, and other aids.

-In construction, on the other hand, meaning is decided about how the
text should be applied in real life. While applying broader principles to
language, especially when the text is vague, ambiguous, or simply silent
on a certain issue, construction is involved.

2.Methodology

-The methodology for interpretation can, therefore, be considered to

include such aspects as looking into the grammatical structure of the legal
text, the ordinary meaning of the words, and the context in which they are
employed. Judges also make use of some rules of interpretation when
determining the intended meaning of words-including the literal rule, the
golden rule, or the mischief rule.

-However, in construction, law is applied to specific circumstances, and

courts may exercise judicial discretion or refer to broader legal principles
to clear up how a statute or contract should be enforced. Construction
may also require the meaning that is intended, beyond the literal meaning
of the text itself, in order that law might be administered equitably and
uniformly.

3.Role of Context

-Interpretation is essentially concerned with words of the legal text itself

and looks at the internal context, or it takes into account the words
immediately around. However, if there is the possibility of more than one
interpretation of a word or phrase, then external aids such as legislative
history, precedents, or established legal definitions are brought in.

-Construction typically tends to look to the broader context of the law,

such as the whole legal system itself, the values and mores of society, and
often the underlying purpose of a statute or contract. In such a way,
construction affords the ability to make more general considerations when
applying the rule to peculiar circumstances, especially when there are
multiple reasonable interpretations of the text.

4.Ambiguity and Vagueness

-Perhaps one of the more significant differences between interpretation
and construction is even in those instances where the words of a legal
document are ambiguous. Interpretation seeks clarity in ambiguity
through further inquiry into the language, context, and intent behind the
use of those words.

-When ambiguity persists, construction becomes an element. It is aimed

at clarifying the actual application of ambiguous or vague terms in
practice. Construction may include filling gaps, reconciling conflicting
provisions, or giving effect to the underlying purpose of the text.

5.Judicial Discretion

-Interpretation by judges is usually controlled by the words of the text and

the intent of the lawmakers who drafted the text. There would be little
scope for judicial ingenuity or room for discretion since faithful conformity
to the text is what interpretation is after.

-But then again, in construction, it appears that judges can stretch their
discretion even further. Construction of statutes often obliges courts to
balance different interest considerations but ensure that the application of
the law is congruent with or expressive of the relevant legal principle,
social policy, and public interest. The call for judicial discretion is well
amplified in construction when the involved legal concepts are abstract or
constantly evolving.

Explain the utility, definition, marginal notes, proviso, schedule

and preamble in interpretation of the statutes.

In the interpretation of statutes, various elements like the preamble,

definitions, marginal notes, provisos, and schedules play crucial roles in
clarifying the legislative intent. The preamble outlines the statute’s
purpose and objectives, providing context for interpretation. Definitions
clarify the meaning of specific terms used within the statute. Marginal
notes, though not part of the statute itself, can offer guidance, especially
when the meaning of a section is unclear. Provisos carve out exceptions to
the general rule, while schedules provide supplementary details or lists.
Understanding these elements is essential for accurately interpreting the
law.

1. Preamble:
 The preamble is a statement at the beginning of a statute that
summarizes its main purpose and objectives.
 It provides the context and rationale behind the legislation,
explaining the problem the law seeks to address and the goals it
aims to achieve.
 When interpreting a statute, the preamble can be a valuable tool for
understanding the legislature’s intent, especially when the wording
of the statute is ambiguous.
 For example, the preamble of the Indian Constitution outlines the
fundamental values of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity,
serving as a guiding principle for interpreting the Constitution.
2. Definition or Interpretation Clause:
 A definition clause within a statute provides specific meanings for
terms used throughout the document.
 These clauses help avoid ambiguity and ensure consistent
application of the law by clarifying the intended meaning of certain
words or phrases.
 For instance, a definition clause might clarify that “vehicle” includes
motorcycles and cars, even if the term is not explicitly mentioned in
every section of the law.
3. Marginal Notes:
 Marginal notes: are brief summaries or explanations placed in the
margin of a statute next to individual sections.
 While not considered part of the statute itself, they can offer initial
guidance for understanding the content of each section.
 In the past, marginal notes were sometimes used to interpret
statutes, especially when the wording was unclear.
 However, the modern view is that marginal notes should not be
relied upon as the primary means of interpretation, as they are not
always created or reviewed by the legislature and may not
accurately reflect the legislative intent.
 Courts generally hold that marginal notes cannot override the clear
meaning of a statute’s provisions.
4. Proviso:
 A proviso is a clause within a statute that creates an exception or
qualification to the general rule established by the main provision.
 It specifies circumstances or conditions under which the general rule
does not apply.
 Provisos are often introduced by words like “provided that” or
“except.”
 For example, a law might state a general rule about overtime pay,
but a proviso might specify that certain categories of employees are
exempt from that rule.
5. Schedule:
 A schedule is a part of a statute that contains supplementary
information, lists, or details related to the main provisions of the act.
 Schedules are typically placed at the end of the statute and often
contain things like lists of specific items, tables, or forms.
  For example, a law regulating taxes might include a schedule listing
all the items subject to a particular tax.

Remedial statute

A remedial statute is a law designed to address and correct a wrong or

deficiency in existing law or to provide a remedy for a particular problem.
It aims to improve or reform the law to better address societal needs or
injustices. These statutes are often interpreted liberally to give effect to
their remedial purpose.

Key characteristics of remedial statutes:

 Purpose: To correct defects or injustices in the existing law, provide

a remedy for a specific problem, or improve legal processes.
 Interpretation: Generally interpreted liberally, meaning courts
give them the broadest possible meaning to achieve their remedial
purpose.
 Examples: Welfare legislation like the Maternity Benefits Act or
Workmen’s Compensation Act, and laws designed to address
procedural errors in previous legislation.
 Contrast with Penal Statutes: Remedial statutes are different
from penal statutes, which impose punishment for offenses.
Remedial statutes focus on providing a remedy, while penal statutes
focus on punishment.
 Focus on Fairness and Justice: They often reflect a demand for
social justice or welfare, aiming to address imbalances or hardships
faced by certain groups.
 “Mischief Rule”: When interpreting remedial statutes, courts often
consider the “mischief” (problem or defect) the law is intended to
address, ensuring the remedy provided by the statute is effective in
resolving it.

Examples of Remedial Statutes:

 Maternity Benefits Act, 1961: This act provides benefits to

women during and after pregnancy, addressing a gap in the
previous law concerning women’s rights in the workplace.
 Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923: This law provides
compensation to workers who suffer injuries or disabilities in the
course of their employment, aiming to protect their economic well-
being.
 Liberal Interpretation: When interpreting remedial statutes,
courts often consider the “mischief” the statute was intended to
address and the language used to achieve the remedy. The focus is
on giving the statute the broadest possible meaning to achieve its
 remedial purpose, ensuring that the intended beneficiaries receive
the intended relief.
1. Classification of Statutes by Duration
 Temporary Statute: A temporary statute is one that specifies a
fixed period of operation and validity within the statute itself. It
remains in effect until the specified time elapses unless repealed
earlier. If the legislature wishes to extend its effect, a new
enactment is required. For example, the Finance Act is a temporary
statute, requiring annual reauthorisation.
 Permanent Statute: A permanent statute doesn’t have a
predefined expiration date. However, this doesn’t make the statute
unchangeable. It can be amended or repealed by another act.
2. Classification of Statutes by Method
 Mandatory, Imperative or Obligatory Statute: A mandatory
statute compels the performance of certain actions or dictates that
specific things must be carried out in a particular manner or form.
Non-compliance typically leads to legal consequences.
 Directory or Permissive Statute: A directory statute merely
provides guidance or permission for actions without compelling their
performance. In some cases, statutes prescribe conditions or forms
that are considered essential for the regulated action and their
omission can render the action invalid. In other cases, these
prescriptions are seen as non-binding and failure to follow them
might result in penalties if any are stipulated by the statute.
3. Classification of Statues with Reference to Object
 Codifying Statute: A codifying statute is one that aims to
comprehensively outline the entire body of law on a specific subject.
It seeks to provide a thorough and authoritative statement of the
key legal rules pertaining to that subject. This includes existing
provisions from various statutes on the subject and may also
incorporate common law principles.
 Consolidating Statute: A consolidating statute consolidates all
statutory enactments related to a particular subject into a single
law, making it easier to access and understand. It brings together
existing statutory provisions on the subject, often with minor
modifications.
 Declaratory Statute: A declaratory statute is one that clarifies and
removes doubts or misunderstandings about the meaning of terms
or expressions within the common law or statutory law. When courts
have interpreted an expression differently from what the legislature
intended, a declaratory statute is passed to set the correct meaning
of that expression. In India, the Income Tax (Amendment) Act of
1985, which added explanation 2 to section 40 of the Income Tax
 Act of 1961 and the Finance Act of 1987, which amended the
definition of “Owner of house property” in section 27, are examples
of declaratory acts. It’s important to note that the mere use of the
phrase “it is hereby declared” does not automatically make a
statute a declaratory statute. A declaratory statute typically
contains a preamble and uses terms like “declared” and “enacted”
to signal its intent.
 Remedial Statute : A remedial statute is a kind of law that offers
new help or a new solution. Its main purpose is to improve how
rights are protected and address problems or errors in the old law.
Examples of remedial statutes include the Maternity Benefits Act of
1961 and the Workmen’s Compensation Act of 1923. In these laws,
you’ll often find the phrase “for remedy whereof” right before the
actual law.
 Enabling Statute: An enabling statute is a law that allows
something that was previously forbidden, with or without specific
rules on how to do it. It widens the scope of what’s allowed under
common law. An enabling statute makes an action lawful, even if it
wouldn’t be otherwise.
 Disabling Statute : A disabling statute is one that limits or
reduces a right granted by common law. It’s a law that restricts a
common law right.
 Penal Statute : A penal statute is a law that punishes certain
actions or wrongdoings. This type of law can be in the form of a
detailed criminal code with many sections that define punishments
for different wrongs. For example, the Criminal Procedure Code, the
Indian Penal Code, the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954
and the Arms Act of 1959 are all examples of penal statutes.
Penalties for breaking these laws can include fines, the loss of
property, imprisonment or even the death penalty. When the law
enforces obedience not through individual lawsuits but by imposing
punishments as commanded by the law, it’s considered a penal
statute. Penalties can only be imposed when the law explicitly states
so and any doubts should benefit the accused.
 Taxing Statute: A taxing statute is a law that imposes taxes on
income or certain types of transactions. Examples include income
tax, wealth tax, sales tax and gift tax. These taxes help the
government collect money to support public welfare. However, it’s
essential that a statute clearly states that taxes must be paid and
any doubts about this should benefit the person being taxed.
 Explanatory Statute :An explanatory statute is a law that explains
another law. It’s created to fill in gaps or clarify confusing parts of a
previous law. An explanatory statute aims to make the meaning of
 an expression used in an earlier law clearer. For instance, in Britain,
the Royal Mines Act of 1688 was passed to encourage the mining of
certain base metals. The Royal Mines Act of 1963 was enacted to
provide a better explanation of the earlier law.
 Amending Statute : An amending statute is a law that adds to or
changes the original law to improve it or better achieve its original
purpose. It doesn’t cancel out the old law; it becomes part of it.
Examples include the Direct Taxes Amendments Act of 1974 and the
Land Acquisition (Amendments) Act of 1984.
 Repealing Statute :A repealing statute is a law that cancels out an
earlier law. It can do this explicitly by saying so in the statute or
implicitly through its language. For example, the Hyderabad District
Municipalities Act of 1956 repealed the Hyderabad Municipal and
Town Committees Act of 1951.
 Curative or Validating Statute : A curative or validating statute
is one passed to fix problems in a previous law or to make legal
proceedings, documents or actions valid, even if they didn’t meet
the legal requirements. These statutes often include phrases like
“notwithstanding any judgment, decree or court order.” They’re
meant to make previously unlawful actions legal or to overturn court
decisions.

Rules of Interpretation

1. Literal or Grammatical Rule

It is the first rule of interpretation. According to this rule, the words used
in this text are to be given or interpreted in their natural or ordinary.
Meaning. After the interpretation, if the meaning is completely clear and
unambiguous then the effect shall be given to a provision of a statute
regardless of what may be the consequences.

The basic rule is that whatever the intention legislature had while making
any provision it has been expressed through words and thus, are to be
interpreted according to the rules of grammar. It is the safest rule of
interpretation of statutes because the intention of the legislature is
deduced from the words and the language used.

According to this rule, the only duty of the court is to give effect if the
language of the statute is plain and has no business to look into the
consequences which might arise. The only obligation of the court is to
expound the law as it is and if any harsh consequences arise then the
remedy for it shall be sought and looked out by the legislature.

Case Laws
Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay, In this case, the appellant, a citizen
of India after arriving at the airport did not declare that he was carrying
gold with him. During his search was carried on, gold was found in his
possession as it was against the notification of the government and was
confiscated under section 167(8) of Sea Customs Act.

Later on, he was also charged under section 8 of the Foreign Exchange
Regulations Act, 1947. The appellant challenged this trial to be violative
under Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution. According to this article, no
person shall be punished or prosecuted more than once for the same
offence. This is considered as double jeopardy.

It was held by the court that the Seas Act neither a court nor any judicial
tribunal. Thus, accordingly, he was not prosecuted earlier. Hence, his trial
was held to be valid.

2. The Mischief Rule

Mischief Rule was originated in Heydon’s case in 1584. It is the rule of

purposive construction because the purpose of this statute is most
important while applying this rule. It is known as Heydon’s rule because it
was given by Lord Poke in Heydon’s case in 1584. It is called as mischief
rule because the focus is on curing the mischief.

In the Heydon’s case, it was held that there are four things which have to
be followed for true and sure interpretation of all the statutes in general,
which are as follows-

1. What was the common law before the making of an act.

2. What was the mischief for which the present statute was enacted.
3. What remedy did the Parliament sought or had resolved and
appointed to cure the disease of the commonwealth.
4. The true reason of the remedy.The purpose of this rule is to
suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.

Case Laws

Smith v. Huges, 1960 WLR 830, in this case around the 1960s, the
prostitutes were soliciting in the streets of London and it was creating a
huge problem in London. This was causing a great problem in maintaining
law and order. To prevent this problem, Street Offences Act, 1959 was
enacted. After the enactment of this act, the prostitutes started soliciting
from windows and balconies.

Further, the prostitutes who were carrying on to solicit from the streets
and balconies were charged under section 1(1) of the said Act. But the
prostitutes pleaded that they were not solicited from the streets.
The court held that although they were not soliciting from the streets yet
the mischief rule must be applied to prevent the soliciting by prostitutes
and shall look into this issue. Thus, by applying this rule, the court held
that the windows and balconies were taken to be an extension of the word
street and charge sheet was held to be correct.

3. The Golden Rule

It is known as the golden rule because it solves all the problems of

interpretation. The rule says that to start with we shall go by the literal
rule, however, if the interpretation given through the literal rule leads to
some or any kind of ambiguity, injustice, inconvenience, hardship,
inequity, then in all such events the literal meaning shall be discarded and
interpretation shall be done in such a manner that the purpose of the
legislation is fulfilled.

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.

This rule suggests that the consequences and effects of interpretation

deserve a lot more important because they are the clues of the true
meaning of the words used by the legislature and its intention. At times,
while applying this rule, the interpretation done may entirely be opposite
of the literal rule, but it shall be justified because of the golden rule. The
presumption here is that the legislature does not intend certain objects.
Thus, any such interpretation which leads to unintended objects shall be
rejected.

Case law

State of Punjab v. Quiser Jehan Begum, AIR 1963 SC 1604, a period of

limitation was prescribed for, under section 18 of land acquisition act,
1844, that an appeal shall be filed for the announcement of the award
within 6 months of the announcement of the compensation. Award was
passed in the name of Quiser Jehan. It was intimated to her after the
period of six months about this by her counsel. The appeal was filed
beyond the period of six months. The appeal was rejected by the lower
courts.

It was held by the court that the period of six months shall be counted
from the time when Quiser Jehan had the knowledge because the
interpretation was leading to absurdity. The court by applying the golden
rule allowed the appeal.
Different parts of statute

 Title : Long Title and Short Title The Long Title of a Statute is
an internal part of the statute and is admissible as an aid to
its construction as it gives the description about the object of
an Act. The long title of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is –
“An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to criminal
procedure”. In Re Kerala Education bill, the Supreme Court held that
the policy and purpose may be deduced from the long title and the
preamble. In Manohar Lal v State of Punjab, Long title of the Act is
relied as a guide to decide the scope of the Act.The short title of an
Act is for the purpose of reference & for its identification. It begins
with “This Act is called as.. and it ends with the year of passing of
the Act. For E.g. “The Indian Penal Code, 1860”; “The Indian
Evidence Act, 1872”. Even though short title is the part of the
statute, it does not have any role in the interpretation of the
provisions of an Act.
 Preamble : The main objective and purpose of the Act are found in
the Preamble of the Statute. Preamble is actually the Act in a
nutshell. It is a preparatory statement and contains the recitals
showing the reason for enactment of the Act. If the language of the
Act is clear the preamble must be ignored. The preamble is an
intrinsic aid in the interpretation of an ambiguous act. In Kashi
Prasad v State, the court held that even though the preamble
cannot be used to defeat the enacting clauses of a statute, it can be
treated as a key for the interpretation of the statute. That is why
preamble is called as the key to open the mind of law makers
 Definition Clause : The object of a definition is to avoid the
necessity of frequent repetitions in describing the subject
matter to which the word or expression defined is intended to
apply. A definition contained in the definition clause of a particular
statute should be used for the purpose of that Act. Definition from
any other statute cannot be borrowed and used ignoring the
definition contained in the statute itself. But if a particular word is
not defined in the definition clause then it has to be borrowed from
the General Clauses Act.
 Headings and Title of the Chapter :Headings are of two kinds –
one prefixed to a section and other prefixed to a group or set of
sections. Heading is to be regarded as giving the key to v blankthe
interpretation and the heading may be treated as preambles to the
provisions following them. In Krishnaih V. State of (A.P. AIR 2005 AP
10) it was held that headings prefixed to sections cannot control the
plain words of the provisions. Only in the case of ambiguity or
 doubt, heading or sub-heading may be referred to as an aid
in construing provision. In Durga Thathera v Narain Thathera, the
court held that the headings are like a preamble which helps as a
key to the mind of the legislature but do not control the substantive
section of the enactment. For example chapter IV ie Section 76 to
106 deals with General Exceptions and in that Section 96 to 106
deals with Private defence and section 96 deals with Things done in
private defence. Chapter IV of Indian Constitution deals with
Fundamental Rights and in that Article 14 to 18 deals with Right to
equality and Article 14 deals with Equality before Law and Equal
Protection of Law
 Sections: Sections are the core area in a statute which the judges
have to interpret while deciding a case.
 Explanation: An Explanation is added to a section to elaborate
upon and explain the meaning of the words appearing in the
section. An Explanation to a statutory provision has to be read with
the main provision to which it is added as an Explanation. An
Explanation appended to a section or a sub-section becomes an
integral part of it and has no independent existence apart from it.
The purpose of an Explanation is not to limit the scope of the main
section. An Explanation is quite different in nature from a proviso;
the latter excludes, excepts and restricts while the former
explains, clarifies or subtracts or includes something by introducing
a legal fiction.
 Provisos: The normal function of a proviso is to except and deal
with a case which would otherwise fall within the general language
of the main enactment, and its effect is confined to that case. It
means that the object of proviso is to carve out from the main
section a class or category to which the main section does not apply.
Proviso limits the ambit of the section which it qualifies. It normally
starts with the word ‘provided’ Section 300 of Indian Penal Code
defines murder and also contains proviso which states under five
circumstances it does not amount to murder.
 Non-Obstante and Subject to clause :When a provision of any
enactment is made ‘subject to’ some other provision, it conveys the
idea that such provision shall yield to another provision to which it is
made subject. Whereas a non-obstante clause is a legislative device
to give overriding effect to certain provisions over some contrary
provisions that may be found either in the same enactment or
some other enactment, that is to say, to avoid the operation and
effect of all contrary provisions, to which such non-obstante
provision has been given over-riding effect.
  Illustrations : Illustrations in enactment provided by the
legislature are valuable aids in understanding the real scope. In
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. Though illustrations are an essential part of
the statutes and cannot be discounted, there are certain
limitations to their use. Illustrations cannot be resorted to for
constructing the meaning of a provision if its wordings are clear,
precise and unambiguous; they cannot have the effect of modifying
the language of the section; they cannot be used to curtail or
expand the ambit of a section which is alone in the enactment; they
cannot control the real context of the section and if there occurs
contradiction among the illustration and a section, the section will
prevail.
 Marginal Notes : Marginal notes are the notes which are inserted
at the side of the sections in an Act and express the effect of the
sections stated. Marginal notes appended to the Articles of the
Constitution have been held to constitute part of the
constitution as passed by the constituent assembly and therefore
they have been made use of in construing the articles. In Wilkes v
Goodwin, the Court held that the side notes are not part of the Act
and hence marginal notes cannot be referred.
 Schedules : Schedules form part of a statute. They are at the end
and contain minute details for working out the provisions of the
express enactment. The expression in the schedule cannot
override the provisions of the express enactment. The objective of
the schedule is to make the provisions of the act less complex by
separating the legal part from its additional information and hence,
also making it concise and easy to comprehend.
 Punctuations :Punctuation is a minor element in the construction
of a statute. Only when a statute is carefully punctuated and there
is no doubt about its meaning can weight be given to punctuation. It
cannot, however, be regarded as a controlling element for
determining the meaning of a statute.”

Explain the rules of interpretation of consolidating and codifying

statute.

Consolidating and codifying statutes both aim to streamline and clarify the
law, but they differ in their scope and approach. Consolidating statutes
bring together existing laws on a specific subject into one statute, often
repealing the earlier ones. Codifying statutes, on the other hand, aim to
comprehensively state the entire law on a subject, including both
statutory and common law principles, in an orderly and systematic way.
Rules of Interpretation for Consolidating Statutes:

 Emphasis on the language of the statute: Courts primarily

focus on the wording of the consolidating statute itself when
interpreting its provisions.
 Limited recourse to repealed enactments: While courts may
look at prior laws to resolve ambiguity in the consolidating statute,
this is generally done only when the language is unclear.
 Presumption against major changes: Unless clearly stated
otherwise, courts presume that a consolidating statute does not
intend to make significant changes to the existing law.
 Consideration of the historical context: The historical
background of the previous laws can be relevant in understanding
the purpose and intent of the consolidating statute.
 Harmonious construction: Courts strive to interpret the
consolidating statute in a way that avoids conflict with other related
laws.

Case law

In Galloway v. Galloway (1979), it was argued that the Matrimonial Clause

Act of 1950’s provision mentioned in Article 26 (1) only applied to
legitimate children and not to illegitimate children. The court’s judge
disregarded and dismissed the aforementioned interpretation. The court
went on to provide a liberal interpretation, stating that in these situations
the illegitimate child should also be taken into consideration. The Supreme
Court ruled in the State of West Bengal v. Nipendra Nath (1965) that the
definition of the law must come first and that a resource may legitimately
refer to a previous state of law. It was also said that the method by which
the law was created was intended to eliminate the evil that was sought.

Rules of Interpretation for Codifying Statutes:

 Focus on the language of the statute: Similar to consolidating

statutes, the primary focus is on the wording of the codifying statute
itself.
 Limited recourse to repealed enactments: Courts may refer to
repealed statutes or previous case law to resolve ambiguity, but this
is not the primary method of interpretation.
 Presumption against altering the law: Courts presume that a
codifying statute does not intend to change existing law unless
specifically stated.
  Emphasis on the systematic presentation of the law: The
codifying statute aims to present a complete and organized
statement of the law, and interpretation should reflect this.
 Reference to common law principles: Codifying statutes may
incorporate common law principles, and courts may need to
consider these when interpreting the statute.

Case law

When interpreting the codified law in the case of Bank of England v.

Vagliano Brothers (1891), Lord Herschell said, “The goal of a codifying Act
is to resolve the conflict of judgments.” He continued by saying that a
codifying act incorporates all references made in earlier cases. As
ambiguity and misunderstanding are eliminated, the interpretation
becomes more reliable. When interpreting the Income Tax Act, 1992, the
Supreme Court of India held in Subba Rao v. Commissioner of Income Tax
(1956) that the Act is exhaustive and that its purposes demonstrate that it
differs from the general rule. The statute’s prologue declares that it is an
act that may be consolidated and modified.

Difference between codifying and consolidating