GOLDEN RULE OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

 

GOLDEN RULE OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

 

According to Salmond, interpretation is the very process with the help of which the Court seeks to ascertain meaning of the legislation through the medium of authorative form in which it is expressed. When it becomes necessary to interpret the statutes, the Court takes guidance of certain principles which are also known as ‘Rules of Interpretation’, for example- the literal rule, the golden rule, the mischief rule etc. Therefore, Golden Rule of Interpretation is one of the vital rules of Interpretation of statutes.

 

Definition:

 

The Golden Rule is a modification of the principle of grammatical or literal rule of interpretation. This rule lays down that ordinarily, the Court must aim to find out the intention of the legislature or the law-makers from the words which are used in the statute by giving these words their natural meaning but if doing such a thing leads to issues like absurdity, repugnance, inconvenience, hardship, injustice or evasion, the Court must modify the meaning to such extent and no further as would prevent such a consequence. On the face of it, this rule solves all problems and is therefore, knows as the golden rule. This approach is also called the modifying method of interpretation.

 

Origin:

 

In the year 1857, for the first time, Lord Wensleydale propounded the Golden Rule of interpretation in the case Grey v. Pearson[1]. Thereafter, this rule has become famous by the name of Wensleydale’s Golden Rule.

 

Approaches:

 

Golden Rule can be used using two types of approach:

 

i)             Narrow Approach: The Narrow Approach is used when the words used in a statute is ambiguous. This means that such words have more than one meaning. In such cases it depends on the Judge to decide which meaning is more acceptable for the case beforehand.

 

ii)           Wide Approach: The Wide Approach is often used when there is just one literal meaning of a word, however, the meaning is such that if it is used it will lead to absurdity. In such cases the Court is needed to modify the meaning of the word to avoid absurdity.

 

Methods of Application of Golden Rule:

 

Some Scholars have tried to lay down ways by which the meaning of the statute is to be ascertained. Austin is one of them. He has divided the interpretative process into three sub-processes:

 

i)             Finding the rule;

ii)           Finding the intention of the legislature;

iii)         Extending or restricting the statute to cover cases.

 

Hence, it can be said that the first step of interpretative process is to find the appropriate rule or provision and to apply it to the case at hand. If the literal meaning of the statute is applicable then such should be applied. It is only when the literal meaning of a word is absurd, the golden rule of interpretation comes into play.

 

Judicial Pronouncements:

 

In the case Lee v. Knapp[2], interpretation of the word ‘stop’ was involved. Under Section 77(1) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, it is laid down that a driver causing and accident shall ‘stop’ after the accident. In this case a driver stopped for a moment after causing an accident and then moved away. Applying the Golden Rule the Court held that the requirement as specified under Section 77(1) of the Road Traffic Act had not been fulfilled by the said driver as he had not stopped for a reasonable period of time requiring interested persons to make necessary inquiries from him about the accident.

 

In the case, State of Punjab v. Mst. Qaisar Jehan Begum And Anr[3], the respondents’ lands were acquired by the appellant but the respondents were not aware about the acquisition and were not present at the time of the award. The collector awarded compensation but the respondents, after a year, contended the valuation of their lands. The Senior Subordinate Judge on being presented this case rejected their application on the basis of the fact that it was already 6 months since the sale and was thus beyond the period of limitation as per Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The issue of the case was whether the limitation period starts from the day of the sale or from the day of getting knowledge of the award. The Court here applied the Golden Rule modifying the meaning of the provision to include the start of the limitation period from the date of receiving the notice of the award.

 

In the case Ramji Missar v. State of Bihar[4], the appellant and his brother were charged with different sections of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting a person. It was established that the younger brother, who was 19 at the time of the offence had no intention to cause a harm and was charged under a less severe section. The Appellant argued that since his younger brother was under 21 years of age at the date of the offence, Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 should be applied in this case.

 

The question before the Court was whether the age of the accused should be determined on the date of the offence or the date of the guilty verdict.

 

The Supreme Court applied the Golden Rule of Interpretation in this case and concluded that the age determination under for Section 6 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 should be based on the date of the guilty verdict and not on the date of the offence.

 

PS: Is the Golden Rule really so golden? If you are curious about check out this link.

 

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.

 


[1] 1857(6) H.L. Cas. 61.

[2] (1967) 2 Q.B. 442

[3] 1963 AIR 1604, 1964 SCR (1) 971

[4] 1963 AIR 1088, 1963 SCR Supl. (2) 745

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POWERS & FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTORS IN A BANKING COMPANY

Image
  POWERS & FUNCTIONS OF DIRECTORS IN A BANKING COMPANY   A ‘Director’ is an elected individual who, along with other Directors, is responsible for a Bank’s policy and other fields. Collectively, the Directors form the Board of Directors. It can be said that in a Company, a Director is a hired person who is in charge of managing its business. Primarily, the Directors aim to look out for the wellbeing of the Bank and promote success for the benefit of its members, depositors, shareholders and other creditors. For this reason, the Directors are bestowed with various powers over any part or whole of the Banking Companies and they are liable to perform certain functions in accordance to the power given to them.   In Indian Banking System, before 1949, the provisions of Part XA of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 (as amended in 1936) governed the banking companies in India. Therefore, the Directors of these Banking Companies were also used to be governed by these provisions. However, th
Read more

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENTS AND THEIR REMEDIES

Image
                COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENTS                                 AND THEIR REMEDIES                                                                 What is Copyright Infringement:   Copyright law gives rights to the owner of the copyright, permitting him to do certain acts in respect of the thing in which the right subsists. Any person who does one of these acts without the permission that is license from the owner of the copyright or from the authority i.e., the Registration of Copyrights is said to be infringement of the right. Hence, it can be said that Copyright infringement refers to the unauthorized use of someone’s copyrighted work. Thus, it is the use of someone’s copyrighted work without permission thereby infringing certain rights of the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work.   In such circumstances, the owner of the copyright is able to get remedies by way of taking some measures like civil, criminal and ad
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 rights and duties.   v Definitio
Read more