DEFINITIONS & OBJECTIVES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

 

DEFINITIONS & OBJECTIVES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

 

DEFINITIONS & OBJECTIVES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

 

Meaning of Interpretation:

 

The term ‘Interpretation’ has been derived from the Latin term ‘Interpretari’, which means to explain, expound, understand or to translate. Interpretation can be held to be a process of explaining, expounding or translating any text or anything in written form. Interpretation of Statutes basically denotes an act of discovering the true meaning of the language which has been used in the statute.

 

Definition of ‘Interpretation of Statutes’:

 

Interpretation can be defined as the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words of the enactment their natural and ordinary meaning. Interpretation of the statutes is the procedure of ascertaining the true meaning of the words used in a statute. The Court is expected to interpret arbitrarily and therefore there have been certain principles which have evolved out of the continuous exercise by the courts. These principles, which have evolved in such a way, are sometimes called ‘rules of interpretation’.

 

According to Salmond, Interpretation and Construction is the process by which the Courts seek to ascertain the very Meaning of the legislature through the medium of authorative forms in which it is expressed.

 

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

 

Objectives of Interpretation:

 

1)   The object of Interpretation of statute is to ascertain the true meaning of the words used in a statute. When the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, there is no need for the rules of interpretation. However, inconsistency, unclear and contradictory meaning could arise from the complexities of the laws due to the technical language. In certain scenarios or cases more than one meaning may be derived from the same word or sentence. It is therefore necessary in those cases to interpret the statute to find out the real intention of the statute.

 

2)   Legal terms may deem to have several meanings depending upon the context. In each proceeding, the parties are in need to use such description and sense of the terminology that is most beneficial to them. In such scenario, it is indeed the duty of the court to determine the correct use of such terminology or vocabulary to serve justice, equity and good conscience. For this, interpretation of statutes is an absolute necessity. Therefore, a vital objective of interpretation is to decide the most correct use of legal terms.

 

3)   It is to be noted that it is not absolutely impossible for the law-makers themselves to make mistakes while forming law itself. Another objective of Interpretation is finding out any mistake that had not been found by the law-makers while formulation of legislation may have occurred.

 

4)   Another vital objective of Interpretation is to fill the gaps in law. It is impossible for the lawmakers to draft the law anticipating all the possible scenarios that could arise in future and this impossibility leads to the use of indeterminate language. Therefore, the courts from time to time have to interpret such indeterminate language according to the present scenarios.

 

5)   There is a possibility that such circumstance may arrive before the court which are not covered by the law. In such cases, it is up to the court to determine whether the legislation should be interpreted in a manner which brings such circumstances within the purview of the known law or should such circumstances give rise to the need of introduction of new legislation. Interpretation of statute in such cases is needed to determine the path which the court must take to solve the issue in front of it.

 

6)   Overall, it can be said Interpretation has two basic objectives. That is to ascertain-

i)             Legislative Language; and

ii)           Legislative Intent.

 

 

Judicial Pronouncements:

 

A Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court in R.S. Nayak v. A.R. Antulay, 1984 AIR 684, 1984 SCR (2) 495, held that if words of the statutes are clear and unambiguous, it is undoubtedly the plainest duty of the Court to give effect to the natural meaning of the words used in the provision. The question of construction or interpretation arise only in the event of an ambiguity or the plain meaning of the words used in the statute would be self-defeating.

 

Following the same principle, the Supreme Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, 2002 made similar observation that is where the words of the statutes are clear and there is no obscurity and there is no ambiguity and the intention of the legislature is clearly conveyed, there is no scope for the Court to take upon itself the task of amending or altering statutory provisions.


References:

 

Websites-

 

·      iPleaders Blog ( https://blog.ipleaders.in/ )

 

·      Legal Service India (  https://www.legalserviceindia.com/ )

 

·      Indian Kanoon ( https://indiankanoon.org/ )

 

Books-

 

·      ‘The Interpretation of Statutes’ by Prof. T. Bhattacharya.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bridging the gap between Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023 (BNS)

Image
  Introduction The legal landscape of India is a complex and ever-evolving entity. It is governed by a plethora of laws and regulations that have been enacted over the years to address various aspects of societal behavior and governance. Two significant legal frameworks that shape the Indian legal system are the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the relatively new entrant, the Bharatiya Nay Sanhita (BNS). In this article, we will explore the differences between these two legal codes and discuss the advantages of introducing the Bharatiya Nay Sanhita. I. Understanding the Indian Penal Code (IPC) The Indian Penal Code, enacted in 1860 during British rule, serves as the bedrock of criminal law in India. It was drafted by Thomas Babington Macaulay and has undergone several amendments since its inception. The IPC defines various offenses, their punishments, and the procedures to be followed in criminal cases. It is an exhaustive document that covers a wide range of criminal activities, ...
Read more

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NATURAL PERSON AND JURISTIC PERSON WITH EXAMPLE.

Image
  DISTINGUISH BETWEEN NATURAL PERSON AND JURISTIC PERSON WITH EXAMPLE.    Introduction   In Jurisprudence, it is expressly stated that there are two kinds of person recognized by law and they are natural person and juristic person . Therefor it can be said that person is genus while natural person and juristic persons are its species. Below, the meaning definition and overall concept of person are explained in detail.   Person   v Meaning -   The word ‘Person’ has been derived from the Latin word ‘ persona ’. This term has a long history. At the beginning, the word persona simply used mean a mask. Later on, persona was used to denote the part played by a man in his life. Next to that, the very word was used to denote the man who played the part. Later, in Roman Law, the term became synonymous with the term caput . A slave had an imperfect persona . Lastly, the term was used in the sense of a being who is capable of sustaining rig...
Read more