Internal and External Aid

INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AIDS TO INTERPRETATION

• INTRODUCTION
• Interpretation means the process of ascertaining the true meaning of the words
used in a statute. The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the
intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.
• Judges take the help of both Rules and Aids in the interpretation of Statutes.
• As stated by the Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. Income Tax Officer, Ernakulam
AIR 1981 SC 1922, interpretation of statute being an exercise in the ascertainment
of meaning, everything which is logically relevant should be admissible. A Rule is a
uniform or established course of things. There are three rules of interpretation of
statutes- Literal, Golden and Mischief. An Aid, on the other hand is a device that
helps or assists. For the purpose of construction or interpretation, the court has to
take recourse to various internal and external aids.
An ‘Aid’ is a device that helps or assists. While performing the function of
interpreting provision of a statute, the Court can take help from within the Statute or
even outside the statute.

• INTERNAL OR INTRINSIC AIDS

• I. Title
• 2. Preamble
• 3. Headings & Marginal notes
• 4. Sections & sub – sections.
• 5. Punctuations
• 6. Illustrations.
• 7. Exceptions.
• 8. Proviso & Saving clauses.
• 9. Schedules.
• 10. Non Obstante clause
•
EXTERNAL OR EXTRINSIC AIDS

• 1. Dictionary.
• 2. Translation.
• 3. Travaux Preparations.
• 4. Statutes in pari material.
• 5. Contemporanea Expostio.
• 6. Debates.
• 7. Reports.
• PREAMBLE
• It expresses the scope, object and purpose of the Act more
comprehensively than the Long title.
• The preamble may depict the ground and the cause of making a statute
and the evil which is sought to be remedied by it.
• For e.g. the Preamble of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is “Whereas it is
expedient to provide a general Penal Code for India; it is enacted as
follows”.
• When preamble can be referred:
• When wording gives rise to doubts or where the words or phrase has more
than one meaning. Hence, the preamble can be referred only when the
language of the statute is not clear.
• It does not override the plain provision of the Act.
PUNCTUATION

• In ancient times, statutes were passed without punctuation and naturally,

therefore, the courts were not concerned with looking at punctuation.
• But in modern times statutes contain punctuation. Therefore, whenever a
matter comes before the courts for interpretation, the courts first look at the
provision as they are punctuated and if they feel that there is no ambiguity
while interpreting the punctuated provision, they shall so interpret it.
• However, while interpreting the provision in the punctuated form if the court
feels repugnancy or ambiguity, the court shall read the whole provision
without any punctuation and if the meaning is clear will so interpret it
without attaching any importance whatsoever to the punctuation.
In Mohammad Shabbir v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1979 SC 564

• Interpretation of Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 was

in question.
• This provision says that whoever ‘manufactures for sale, sells, stocks
or exhibits for sale or distributes’ a drug without licence would be
liable to punishment.
• The Supreme Court held that mere stocking of a drug is not an
offence and an offence is made out only when stocking is for sale.
• There is no comma after the word ‘stocks’ which means that the
words ‘stocks or exhibits’ are both qualified by the words ‘for sale’
used thereafter.
Non-obstante clause
• While recognising the force of this argument it is however necessary to observe that al- though
ordinarily there should be a close approximation between the non-obstante clause and the
operative part of the section, the non-obstante clause need not necessarily and always be co-
extensive with the operative part, so as to have the effect of cutting down the clear terms of an
enactment. If the words of the enactment are clear and are capable of only one interpretation
on a plain and grammatical construction of the words thereof a non- obstante clause cannot cut
down the construction and restrict the scope of its operation.

• In such cases the non-obstante clause has to be read as clarifying the whole position and must
be understood to have been incorporated in the enactment by the Legislature by way of
abundant caution and not by way of limiting the ambit and scope of the operative part of the
enactment".
• A clause beginning with ‘notwithstanding anything contained in this Act
or in some particular provision in the Act or in some particular Act or in
any law for the time being in force’, is sometimes appended to a section
in the beginning, with a view to give the enacting part of the section in
case of conflict an overriding effect over the provision or Act mentioned
in the non obstante clause.
• It is equivalent to saying that in spite of the provision or Act mentioned
in the non obstante clause, the enactment following it will have its full
operation or that the provisions embraced in the non obstante clause
will not be impediment for the operation of the enactment.
• Thus, a non obstante clause may be used as a legislative device to
modify the ambit of the provision or law mentioned in the non obstante
clause or to override it in specified circumstances.
• If the non obstante clause is ‘notwithstanding anything contained in
any other law’ then the expression ‘any other law’ will refer to any
law other than the Act in which that section occurs.
• In contrast if the expression ‘notwithstanding anything contained in
this Act’ will refer to take away the effect of any provision of the Act
in which the section occurs but it cannot take away the effect of any
other law.
 Aswini Kumar Ghosh v. Arabinda Bose AIR 1952 SC 369
• The petitioner was an Advocate of the Calcutta High Court and also of the Supreme Court of India. The
Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, 1951 is an Act to authorize Advocates of Supreme
Court to practice as of right in any High Court.
• When he filed in the Registry on the original side of the Calcutta High Court a warrant of authority executed
in his favour to appear for a client, it was returned, because under the High Court Rules and Orders,
Original side, an Advocate could only plead and not act.
• The Advocate contended that as an Advocate of the Supreme Court he had a right to practice which right
included the right to act as well as to appear and plead without being instructed by an attorney.
• The contention was accepted by the majority.
• The Supreme Court observed that the non obstante clause can reasonably be read as overriding ‘anything
contained’ in any relevant existing law which is inconsistent with the new enactment, although the
draftsman had primarily in his mind a particular type of law as conflicting with the new Act. The enacting
part of a statue must, where it is clear, be taken to control the non obstante clause where both cannot be
read harmoniously;
• It was further observed that It should first be ascertained what the enacting part of the section provides on
a fair construction of the words used according to their natural and ordinary meaning, and the non
obstante clause is to be understood as operating to set aside as no longer valid anything contained in
relevant existing laws which is inconsistent with the new enactment.
• Interpretation must depend on the text and the context. They are the bases of interpretation. One may well
say if the text is the texture, context is what gives the colour. Neither can be ignored. Both are important.
That interpretation is best which makes the textual interpretation match the contextual. A statute is best
interpreted when we know why it was enacted. With this knowledge, the statute must be read, first as a
whole and then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by phrase and word by word.

• If a statute is looked at, in the context of its enactment, with the glasses of the statute- maker, provided by
such context, its scheme, the sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour and appear different than
when the statute is looked at without the glasses provided by the context. With these glasses we must look at
the Act as a whole and discover what each section, each clause, each phrase and each word is meant and
designed to say as to fit into the scheme of the entire Act.

• No part of a statute and no word of a statute can be construed in isolation. Statutes have to be construed so
that every word has a place and everything is in its place".
• If we examine the scope of Rule 3(2) particularly along with other

General Rules, the context in which Rule 3(2) is made is very clear.

• It is not enacted to supersede the Special Rules.

Schedule added to an act

• Part of the Statute to which it is appended.

• Flower freight Co. Ltd. Vs Hammond;

- Schedule I of the Roads Traffic Act 1960 laid down and explained “goods
vehicles”.
- The said provision (Section 191(1) was read with the Schedule.
- https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/16/schedule/FIRST/enact
ed
 Aphali Pharmaceuticals Ltd. V State of Maharashtra (1989)

• A Schedule in an Act of Parliament is a mere question of drafting. It is the

legislative intent that is material. An Explanation to the Schedule amounts
to an Explanation in the Act itself.

• The Schedule may be used in construing provisions in the body of the Act.
It is as much an Act of the Legislature as the Act itself and it must be read
together with the Act for all purposes of construction. Expressions in the
Schedule cannot control or prevail against express enactment and in case
of any inconsistency between the schedule and the enactment, the
enactment is to prevail and if any part of the schedule cannot be made to
correspond it must yield to the Act.
Indian Revenue Commissioner Vs Gittus

• Two principles that are to be applied in case of a combination of Act

and Schedule.
Punctuation: Gopalan V State of Madras
(1950)
• A22(7)(a): “which” with “comma” twice.
• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/956785/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1797219/
• https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Eliz2/8-9/16/schedule/FIRST/enacted

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1328814/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/327850/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/140035/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/490863/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/187706/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/581566/
• https://3fdef50c-add3-4615-a675-a91741bcb5c0.usrfiles.com/ugd/3fdef5_21128998c5cd42938b0
e7dd14e1812fc.pdf

• https://ccsuniversity.ac.in/bridge-library/pdf-23/SMT%20APEKSHA%20B.A.LL.B.%20VII%20SEM%2
0Interpretation%20of%20Statutes%20(internal%20aids%20of%20interpretation)%20BL-7003.pdf

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1629830/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1271790/

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1907896/#:~:text=Where%20a%20person%20fraudulently%20or,su
ch%20property%20at%20any%20time