6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Image Source: Pixabay

This article has been written by Pooja Kapur, a fifth-year law student of Amity Law School, Noida and Saumya Badigineni, B.A.
LL.B. (IV Year) of Symbiosis Law School, Hyderabad. They has discussed the meaning and rules of interpretation of statutes with
relevant case laws.

Table of Contents


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 2/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know
1. Introduction
2. Interpretation meaning
3. Construction meaning
4. Difference between Interpretation and Construction
4.1. Interpretation
4.2. Construction
5. Classification of Statutes
5.1. Codifying statutes
5.2. Consolidating statutes
5.3. Declaratory statutes
5.4. Remedial statutes
5.5. Enabling statutes
5.6. Disabling statutes
5.7. Penal statutes
5.8. Taxing statutes
5.9. Explanatory statutes
5.10. Amending statutes
5.11. Repealing statutes
5.12. Curative or repealing statutes
6. Rules of Interpretation
6.1. Literal or Grammatical Rule
6.2. The Mischief Rule
6.3. The Golden Rule
6.4. Five part analysis of the golden rule of interpretation
6.5. Applicability and usage of golden rule of interpretation
6.6. The judicial criticism faced on the application of golden rule
6.7. Case laws
6.8. Harmonious Construction
7. Conclusion

Introduction
One of the most substantial and the principal duty which are vested on the judiciary is the interpretation of the statutes or law
which are in force. When the courts deliver justice in a legal dispute, they strictly abide with the boundaries framed by the legal
frameworks which encompasses certain laws, statutes, The Constitution and delegated legislations. The legal framework of a
democratic country like India includes a plethora of legislations and regulations. The Legislature with the compliance of the
procedural Parliamentary rules, formulates and drafts certain written statutes and legislations. The courts deliver justice in a
legal matter by interpreting the underlying principles in these legislations. The written laws are substantiated by the courts and 
https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 3/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

justice is administered by the courts through the pronouncement of verdict over the legal dispute. For the purpose of
interpreting statues and to prevent any wrongful interpretation of the laws, the court should follow certain rules to shape these
laws. So, one of the most basic rules of interpretation is the Literal rule of Interpretation of statutes where the court interprets
the wordings of the law as it is. However, there may be certain loopholes which may be found in the law due to which it is not
interpret a straight-forward understanding of the language of the statutes. It may lead to ambiguity and absurdity if the courts
interpret the natural meaning of the language used in the statute.

Interpretation meaning
The term has been derived from the Latin term ‘interpretari’, which means to explain, expound, understand, or to translate.
Interpretation is the process of explaining, expounding and translating any text or anything in written form. This basically
involves an act of discovering the true meaning of the language which has been used in the statute. Various sources used are
only limited to explore the written text and clarify what exactly has been indicated by the words used in the written text or the
statutes.

Interpretation of statutes is the correct understanding of the law. This process is commonly adopted by the courts for
determining the exact intention of the legislature. Because the objective of the court is not only merely to read the law but is
also to apply it in a meaningful manner to suit from case to case. It is also used for ascertaining the actual connotation of any
Act or document with the actual intention of the legislature.

There can be mischief in the statute which is required to be cured, and this can be done by applying various norms and theories
of interpretation which might go against the literal meaning at times. The purpose behind interpretation is to clarify the meaning
of the words used in the statutes which might not be that clear.

According to Salmond, “Interpretation” 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.

Click Here

Construction meaning
In simple words, construction is the process of drawing conclusions of the subjects which are beyond the direct expression of the
text. The courts draw findings after analysing the meaning of the words used in the text or the statutes. This process is known 
https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 4/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

as legal exposition. There are a certain set of facts pending before the court and construction is the application of the
conclusion of these facts.

The objective is to assist the judicial body in determining the real intention of the legislature. Its aim is also to ascertain the legal
effect of the legal text.

Difference between Interpretation and Construction

Interpretation Construction

1. In law, interpretation refers to exposing the true sense of the 1. Construction, on the other hand, refers to drawing
provisions of the statutes and to understand the exact conclusions from the written texts which are beyond the
meaning of the words used in any text. outright expression of the legal text.

2. Interpretation refers to the linguistic meaning of the legal 2. The purpose of construction is to determine the legal
text. effect of words and the written text of the statute.

3. In the case where the simple meaning of the text is to be 3. In the case where the literal meaning of the legal text
adopted then the concept of interpretation is being referred results in ambiguity then the concept of construction is
to. adopted.


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 5/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Classification of Statutes
Codified statutory law can be categorized as follows-


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 6/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Codifying statutes
The purpose of this kind of statute is to give an authoritative statement of the rules of the law on a particular subject, which is
customary laws. For example- The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and The Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Consolidating statutes
This kind of statute covers and combines all law on a particular subject at one place which was scattered and lying at different
places. Here, the entire law is constituted in one place. For example- Indian Penal Code or Code of Criminal Procedure.

Declaratory statutes
This kind of statute does an act of removing doubts, clarifying and improving the law based on the interpretation given by the
court, which might not be suitable from the point of view of the parliament. For example- the definition of house property has
been amended under the Income Tax (Amendment) Act, 1985 through the judgement of the supreme court.

Remedial statutes
Granting of new remedies for enforcing one’s rights can be done through the remedial statutes. The purpose of these kinds of
statutes is to promote the general welfare for bringing social reforms through the system. These statutes have liberal
interpretation and thus, are not interpreted through strict means. For example- The Maternity Benefits Act, 1961, The
Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 etc.

Enabling statutes
The purpose of this statute is to enlarge a particular common law. For example- Land Acquisition Act enables the government
to acquire the public property for the purpose of the public, which is otherwise not permissible.


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 7/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Disabling statutes
It is the opposite of what is provided under the enabling statute. Here the rights conferred by common law are being cut down
and are being restrained.

Penal statutes
The offences for various types of offences are provided through these statutes, and these provisions have to be imposed strictly.
For example- Indian Penal Code, 1860.


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 8/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Taxing statutes
Tax is a form of revenue which is to be paid to the government. It can either be on income that an individual earns or on any
other transaction. A taxing statute thus, levies taxes on all such transactions. There can be income tax, wealth tax, sales tax,
gift tax, etc. Therefore, a tax can be levied only when it has been specifically expressed and provided by any statute.

Explanatory statutes
The term explanatory itself indicates that this type of statute explains the law and rectifies any omission left earlier in the
enactment of the statutes. Further, ambiguities in the text are also clarified and checked upon the previous statutes.

Amending statutes
The statutes which operate to make changes in the provisions of the enactment to change the original law for making an
improvement therein and for carrying out the provisions effectively for which the original law was passed are referred to as
amending statutes. For example- Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 amended the code of 1898.

Repealing statutes
A repealing statute is one which terminates an earlier statute and may be done in the express or explicit language of the statute.
For example- Competition Act, 2002 repealed the MRTP Act.

Curative or repealing statutes

Through these statutes, certain acts which would otherwise be illegal are validated by curing the illegality and enables a
particular line of action.


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 9/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

Rules of Interpretation

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 
https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 10/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

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.

Manmohan Das versus Bishan Das, AIR 1967 SC 643

The issue in the case was regarding the interpretation of section 3(1)(c) of U.P Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947. In this
case, a tenant was liable for evidence if he has made addition and alternate in the building without proper authority and
unauthorized perception as materially altered the accommodation or is likely to diminish its value. The appellant stated that only
the constitution can be covered, which diminishes the value of the property and the word ‘or’ should be read as land.

It was held that as per the rule of literal interpretation, the word ‘or’ should be given the meaning that a prudent man
understands the grounds of the event are alternative and not combined.

State of Kerala v. Mathai Verghese and others, 1987 AIR 33 SCR(1) 317, in this case a person was caught along with the
counterfeit currency “dollars” and he was charged under section 120B, 498A, 498C and 420 read with section 511 and 34 of
Indian Penal Code for possessing counterfeit currency. The accused contended before the court that a charge under section
498A and 498B of Indian Penal Code can only be levied in the case of counterfeiting of Indian currency notes and not in the case
of counterfeiting of foreign currency notes. The court held that the word currency notes or bank note cannot be prefixed. The
person was held liable to be charge-sheeted.


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 11/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

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.

Pyare Lal v. Ram Chandra, the accused in this case, was prosecuted for selling the sweeten supari which was sweetened with
the help of an artificial sweetener. He was prosecuted under the Food Adulteration Act. It was contended by Pyare Lal that supari
is not a food item. The court held that the dictionary meaning is not always the correct meaning, thereby, the mischief rule must

https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 12/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

be applicable, and the interpretation which advances the remedy shall be taken into consideration. Therefore, the court held that
the word ‘food’ is consumable by mouth and orally. Thus, his prosecution was held to be valid.

Kanwar Singh v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1965 SC 871.

Issues of the case were as follows- section 418 of Delhi Corporation Act, 1902 authorised the corporation to round up the
cattle grazing on the government land. The MCD rounded up the cattle belonging to Kanwar Singh. The words used in the statute
authorised the corporation to round up the abandoned cattle. It was contended by Kanwar Singh that the word abandoned
means the loss of ownership and those cattle which were round up belonged to him and hence, was not abandoned. The court
held that the mischief rule had to be applied and the word abandoned must be interpreted to mean let loose or left
unattended and even the temporary loss of ownership would be covered as abandoned.

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Sri Krishna Manufacturing Company, AIR 1962 SC 1526, Issue, in this Case,
was that the respondent concerned was running a factory where four units were for manufacturing. Out of these four units one
was for paddy mill, other three consisted of flour mill, saw mill and copper sheet units. The number of employees there were
more than 50. The RPFC applied the provisions of Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952 thereby directing the factory to give the
benefits to the employees.

The person concerned segregated the entire factory into four separate units wherein the number of employees had fallen below
50, and he argued that the provisions were not applicable to him because the number is more than 50 in each unit. It was held
by the court that the mischief rule has to be applied and all the four units must be taken to be one industry, and therefore, the
applicability of PFA was upheld.

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.

https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 13/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

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.

Five part analysis of the golden rule of interpretation

Whenever there is a shadow of scepticism casted on the grammatical construction of any law then in such circumstances, the
golden rule of interpretation can be applied on the law in order to apply it to the facts in a legal dispute. The external
manifestation of the underlying law which is interpreted from reading between the lines projects the true intent of the legislature
for which the golden rule is used. By taking into consideration the consequences of the judgement, the judges have the
discretion to interpret the law in a rational manner. The analysis of Golden Rule can be divided into five categories as discussed
below:

WARBURTON’S CASE

Explaining the principle underlying the Golden rule, Justice Burton in the case of Warburton v. Loveland observed that in the
very first instance of application of law the grammatical sense of the wordings of law must be paid heed. But if there is
involvement of any absurdity, inconsistency, or is against the declared purpose of the statute then in such circumstance, the
grammatical sense of the law can be modified or interpreted so far as there is no injustice caused to the parties of the case.
Even though the elementary rule of interpreting the words as it is in their grammatical sense has been upheld by the courts in
numerous cases like Madan Lal v. Changdeo Sugar Mills, the courts should still be open to various interpretations of the law so
that no injustice is caused. This well-known rule was strictly formulated by Parke B. in the case of Becke v. Smith wherein it was
held that, the wordings of the law which are unambiguous and plain nature should be construed in their regular sense even
though, if in their assessment it is absurd or promotes injustice. We assume the function of the legislature when we deviate from
the ordinary meaning of the statute due to which from the adherence to its literal meaning we prevent the manifestation of
injustice.

LORD WENSLEYDALE’S GOLDEN RULE

The term golden rule was coined by Lord Wensleydale which was later adopted in the case of Gray v. Pearson due to which it is
primarily called the Lord Wensleydale’s Golden Rule of Interpretation. Lord Wensleydale expressing this opinion of the rule,
mentioned that he is deeply awestruck with the perception of the rule which is being universally accepted by the courts all over

https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 14/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

the world in order to understand all the written laws, construing wills and other written frameworks. He also mentioned that the
ordinary derivative and the grammatical construction of the law should be abided by in the first instance unless there is any
absurdity or repugnancy due to which it is necessary to modify the ordinary understanding of the words. In the case of Matteson
v. Hart the golden rule was elaborately discussed by Jervis CJ where he relied on the Golden Rule of Construction in order to
understand the words used by the Legislature in the Acts and also to prevent any absurdity and injustice which may stem from
the intention of the statute.

HEYDON’S RULE OF MISCHIEF

In the Heydon’s Rule of Mischief, he elaborated that only in such circumstances where the intention of the legislature appears to
be unjust, only in such cases the intervention of the office of judges in interpreting the law is reasonable. Slightly deviating from
what Lord Wensleydale has opined, instead of viewing the legislative intent as a whole and construe it all-together, the reasons
for the enactment of the laws in retrospect should be taken into consideration so that we can derive the object it plans to
subserve and the evil it plans to end. In the case of Newspaper Ltd. v. State Industrial Tribunal, the Latin maxim “ex visceribus
actus” was cited which meant that while determining the intention of the legislation, detached sections of parts of the Act should
not be taken, instead the intention of the act as a whole which construes the constituent parts should be considered. This
principle was reaffirmed in the case of Inland Revenue Commissioners. V. Herbert where Lord Haldane interpreted a legislation
which was newly enacted and he adjudged that “Where words of general understanding are used, the common understanding of
men is one main clue to the meaning of legislature.” But the Golden Rule of Interpretation laid by Lord Wensleydale has been a
principle accepted worldwide.

LITERAL GOLDEN MISCHIEF

As described by Lord Granworth LC, this is a “Cardinal Rule ” which is a rule based on common sense which is as strong as can
be”. In the English cases, there are three basic rules as elucidated by GW Paton. Those are:

1. Whatever the result, if the meaning of the wordings of law is plain then they should be applied as per the Literal Rule.

2. Unless there is any ambiguity or absurdity in the wordings of the law, the ordinary sense of the law should be resorted to as
per the Golden Rule.

3. The general policy or intention of the statute must be considered and eliminate the evil which was directed as per the
Mischief Rule.

LATTER PART OF THE RULE


https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 15/32
6/8/24, 6:52 PM Rules of Interpretation of Statutes: All you want to know

There is a lot of care which must be taken with regards to the later part of the Golden Rule and in the case of Christopher v.
Lotinga, every word of the Golden Rule was subscribed to by Justice Willes. In the case of Woodward v. Watts, Justice Crompton
expressed his doubts regarding this rule and opined that the Legislature must have enacted the legislation with a particular
intent which may be destroyed if the courts reinterpret it due to some absurdity which defeats the whole purpose of the
enactment. To understand the applicability of the three methods of judicial approach which is the literal rule, the golden rule and
the mischief that the statute is designed for in order to prevent it, the case of Vacher v. London Society of Compositors can be
referred to. In this case, the validity of Section 4(1) of the Trade Disputes Act, 1906 was in question as to whether any torturous
acts which are committed by the trade unions are included under the protection or is it only such are which was torturous in
nature in furtherance of any trade dispute. Deciding on the former view, the House of Lords relied on the aforementioned three
judicial approaches in which Lord Macnaughten adopted the golden rule of interpretation which is derived from the case of Grey
v. Pearson, while Lord Atkinson espoused the literal approach which is derived from the case of Cooke v. Charles A Vageler and
lastly, the history of the enactment of the stature and the application the mischief method has been relied upon by Lord Moulton.

Applicability and usage of golden rule of interpretation

If there is a choice between two interpretations, then the interpretation which reduces the futility or which is narrower in nature
fails to incorporate the purpose of the legislation due to which such a construction must be avoided as discussed in the case of
Nokes v. Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd by Viscount Simon L.C. Instead, we should admit the bolder form of the
construction which is the intention of the Parliament to enact the legislation only for the purpose of making the result effective.
The transfer of an undertaking which includes, property, duties, liabilities and rights from the old company to a new company is
dealt with under Section 154 of the Companies Act, 1929. In the case of Luke v. R.R.C. an issue was raised with regards to the
transfer of contract of service existing between the former company and the individual. The House of Lords adjudged that the
notice of amalgamation should be provided to the individual. The golden rule of interpretation has been used in this case where
if the prima facie meaning of the words would be taken into consideration, then no consent would be required of the employee
during amalgamation, but this would lead to injustice. But in the present case the court deviated from the wordings of the law
and decided that it is the duty of the transferor company to inform the workers about the amalgamation.

A restricted Construction was adopted by the legislature while drafting the Central Services (Classification, Appeal And Control)
Rules, 1956 specifically Rule 11(VI) due to which it was interpreted by the court by using the Golden Rule in the case of Nyadar
Singh v. Union of India. This provision imposes a penalty if there is any reduction in the grade post or service or the pay scale of
the employee. It was adjudged by the Supreme Court that if any person is appointed to a bigger post or pay grade, then he
cannot be abridged to a lower pay grade or post due to which this provision acquired a wider construction as interpreted by the
Court. As per Maxwell, the applicability of Golden Rule is significant in the area which is dedicated to the construction of

https://blog.ipleaders.in/rules-interpretation-statutes/ 16/32