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

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

DEFINITIONS & OBJECTIVES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES

Image
  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 principl...
Read more