Interpretation of statues

Submitted to lovely professional university

In the proper fulfillment of requirements for the award of the degree of Bachelors of Arts

Course Code: LAW318

CLASS: B.A LLB

SECTION: L1701

Roll no.:A16

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Anant faujdar Priya garg

(11718820)

1|Page
Acknowledgement

Working on the case of tuka ram vs state of Maharashtra was a very knowledgeable
experience. The documentation has actually helped me in enrichment my knowledge on the case
and the subject. The case along with relevant sections and case laws was discussed at deep
lengths in the class which helped me in making this project.
I feel highly privileged to work under the guidance of Mam and sincerely acknowledge her
efforts in directly and indirectly contributing of this piece of work.

Thank u mam

Dr Arshipal kaur

2|Page
 INDEX

S.no Particulars Pg.no

1 Introduction to the case 4
2 Facts 5-6
3 Law points 6
4 Case history 7
5 Issue 8
6 Arguments 8-9
7 The ratio 9-10
8 Cases referred 10
9 Amendments 10-11
10 Critical analysis 11-13
11 conclusion 13
12 Bibliography 14

3|Page
Introduction
The constitution is an organic instrument. It is the fundamental law. The general rule
adopted for construing a written constitution is the same as for construing any other statute. The
constitution should be interpreted so as to give effect to all its parts. 
In democratic countries the judiciary is given a place of great significance. The courts
perform the key role of expounding the provisions of the Constitution. The courts act as the
supreme interpreter, protector and guardian of the supremacy of the Constitution. The judiciary
has to perform an important role in the interpretation and enforcement of human rights inscribed
in the fundamental law of the country. Therefore, it is necessary to consider what should be the
approach of the judiciary in the matter of Constitutional Interpretation. The judiciary has to
devise a pragmatic wisdom to adopt a creative and purposive approach in the interpretation of
various rights embodied in the Constitution. The task of interpreting the constitution is a highly
creative judicial function which must be in tune with the constitutional philosophy. A democratic
society lives and swears by certain values such as individual liberty, human dignity; rule of law,
constitutionalism etc. and it is the duty of the judiciary to so interpret the constitution and the law
as to constantly inculcate these values on which democracy thrives. The predominant positivist
approach of interpretation followed by the Indian Judiciary emanates from the basic traditional
theory that a judge does not create law but merely declares the law.

There are basically three types of interpretation of the constitution.

1. Historical interpretation
Ambiguities and uncertainties while interpreting the constitutional provisions can be
clarified by referring to earlier interpretative decisions.
2. Contemporary interpretation
The Constitution must be interpreted in the light of the present scenario. The situation and
circumstances prevalent today must be considered.
3. Harmonious Construction
It is a cardinal rule of construction that when there are in a statute two provisions which
are in such conflict with each other, that both of them cannot stand together, they should possibly
be so interpreted that effect can be given to both. And that a construction which renders either of
them in operative and useless should not be adopted except in the last resort.

4|Page
 The Supreme Court held in Re Kerala Education Bill1 that in deciding the fundamental
rights, the court must consider the directive principles and adopt the principle of harmonious
construction so two possibilities are given effect as much as possible by striking a balance.
In Qureshi v State of Bihar2, The Supreme Court held that while the state should
implement the directive principles, it should be done in such a way so as not to violate the
fundamental rights.
In Bhatia International v Bulk trading SA3, it was held that if more than one interpretation
is possible for a statute, then the court has to choose the interpretation which depicts the intention
of the legislature.

Interpretation of the preamble of the Constitution

The preamble cannot override the provisions of the constitution. In Re Berubari4, the
Supreme Court held that the Preamble was not a part of the constitution and therefore it could
not be regarded as a source of any substantive power.
In  Keshavananda  Bharathi’s case5, the Supreme Court rejected the above view and held
the preamble to be a part of the constitution. The constitution must be read in the light of the
preamble. The preamble could be used for the amendment power of the parliament under Art.368
but basic elements cannot be amended. 
The 42nd Amendment has inserted the words “Secularism, Socialism and Integrity” in the
preamble.

General rules of interpretation of the Constitution

1. If the words are clear and unambiguous, they must be given full effect.
2. The constitution must be read as a whole.
3. Principles of Harmonious construction must be applied.
4. The constitution must be interpreted in a broad and liberalsense.
5. The court has to infer the spirit of the constitution from the language.

1
1959 1 SCR 995
2
1958 AIR 731
3
(2003) 5 SCC (Jour) 22
4
AIR 1960 SC 845
5
AIR 1973 SC 1461

5|Page
 6. Internal and External aids may be used while interpreting.
7. The Constitution prevails over other statutes.

Principles of Constitutional Interpretation

The following principles have frequently been discussed by the courts while interpreting the
Constitution:

1. Principle of colourable legislation

2. Principle of pith and substance
3. Principle of eclipse
4. Principle of severeability
5. Principle of territorial nexus
6. Principle of implied powers
7. Principle of incidental or ancillary powers

Principle of Colourable Legislation

The doctrine of colourability is the idea that when the legislature wants to do something
that it cannot do within the constraints of the constitution, it colours the law with a substitute
purpose which will still allow it to accomplish its original goal.

Maxim: “Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliqum” which means what
cannot be done directly cannot also be done indirectly.

The rule relates to the question of legislative competency to enact a law. Colourable
Legislation does not involve the question of bonafides or malfides. A legislative transgression
may be patent, manifest or direct or may be disguised, covert or indirect. It is also applied to the
fraud of Constitution.

In India ‘the doctrine of colorable legislation’ signifies only a limitation of the law
making power of the legislature. It comes into picture while the legislature purporting to act
within its power but in reality it has transgressed those powers. So the doctrine becomes
applicable whenever legislation seeks to do in an indirect manner what it cannot do directly. If
the impugned legislation falls within the competence of legislature, the question of doing
something indirectly which cannot be done directly does not arise.

6|Page
 In our Constitution, this doctrine is usually applied to Article 246 which has demarcated
the Legislative competence of the Parliament and the State Legislative Assemblies by outlining
the different subjects under list I for the Union, List II for the States and List III for the both as
mentioned in the seventh schedule.

This doctrine comes into play when a legislature does not possess the power to make law
upon a particular subject but nonetheless indirectly makes one. By applying this principle the
fate of the Impugned Legislation is decided.

Important Case Laws

Case 1: KC Gajapati v. State of Orissa6

Facts: The petitioners were the owners of estates. The Orissa state Legislature enacted the
“Orissa State Estates Abolition Act, 1952” whose primarily purpose of the Act is to abolish all
zamindary and other proprietary estates and interests in the State of Orissa and after eliminating
all the intermediaries, to bring riots or the actual occupants of the lands in direct contact with the
State Government the compensation would be calculated at a certain number of years purchase
of the net annual income of the estate during the previous agricultural year, that is to say, the
year immediately preceding that in which the date of vesting falls. The other sum payable as
income-tax in respect of any other kind of income derived from the estate would also be included
in the deductions. The amount of compensation thus determined is payable in 30 annual equated
installments commencing from the date of vesting and an opinion is given to the State
Government to make full payment at any time.

Issue

Whether “Orissa State Estates Abolition Act”, 1952 is a piece of colourable legislation?

Legal Proposition

That the doctrine of colourable legislation does not involve any question of bonafides or
malafides on the part of the legislature. The whole doctrine resolves itself into the question of
competency of a particular legislature to enact a particular law. If the legislature is competent to

6
AIR 1953 SC 375

7|Page
pass a particular law, the motives which impelled it to act are really irrelevant 7. On the other
hand, if the legislature lacks competency, the question of motive does not arise at all. Whether a
statute is constitutional or not is thus always a question of power “Malice or motive is beside the
point, and it is not permissible to suggest parliamentary incompetence on the score of malafides.
A distinction, however, exists between a legislature which is legally important like the British
Parliament and the laws promulgated by which could not be challenged on the ground of
incompetency, and a legislature which enjoys only a limited or a qualified jurisdiction.

Judgment

The validity of this provision has been challenged on the ground that it is a piece of
colourable legislation which comes within the principle enunciated by the majority of this court
in the Bihar case8. It is difficult to appreciate this argument of the learned counsel. It is not a
legislation on somethimg which is non-existent or unrelated to facts. It cannot also be seriously
contended that what section 37 provides for, is not giving of compensation but of negativing the
right to compensation as the learned counsel seems to suggest. There is no substance in this
contention and we have no hesitation in overruling it. The result is that all the points raised by
the learned counsel for the appellants fail and the appeals are dismissed. Having regard to some
important constitutional questions involved in these cases which needed clearing up, we direct
that each party should bear his own costs in these appeals. Appeal dismissed.

Principle of pith and substance

Pith means ‘true nature’ or essence of something’ and substance means ‘the most
important or essential part of something’. The basic purpose of this doctrine is to determine
under which head of power or field i.e. under which list (given in the seventh schedule) a given
piece of legislation falls.

Union & State Legislatures are supreme within their respective fields. They should not
encroach/ trespass into the field reserved to the other. If a law passed by one trespasses upon the
field assigned to the other—the Court by applying Pith & Substance doctrine, resolve the
difficulty &declare whether the legislature concerned was competent to make the law.

7
MP Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, Wadwa Nagpur, 5 th Ed., 537
8
State of Bihar vs. Maharaja Kameshwar Singh & ors, 1955 SCR 889

8|Page
 If the pith & substance of law (i.e. the true object of the legislation) relates to a matter
within the competence of the legislature which enacted it ,it should be held intra vires—though
the legislature might incidentally trespass into matters not within its competence. The true
character of the legislation can be ascertained by having regard—to the enactment as a whole --
to its object – to the scope and effect of its provisions.

Case : Profulla Kumar vs. Bank of Khulna9

In this case, the Privy Council applied pith & substance doctrine. S. 100 GI Act 1935 is
similar to Art .246 of the Constitution. The Bengal Money Lenders Act 1940 provided for
limiting the amount and the rate of interest recoverable by any money lender on any loan.
Challenged that the Bengal Legislature has no legislative competence. The High Court held the
Act intra vires .But the Federal Court held it ultra vires. On appeal the Privy Council reversed
and held that Bengal Act in pith & substance is within the provincial legislative field. Money
lending in Entry 27 List two. Promissory Notes in Entry 28 List one. The interference was
incidental.

Case: State of Bombay vs. FN Balsara10

Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 which prohibited sale & possession of liquors in the State,
was challenged on the ground that it incidentally encroached upon Imports & Exports of liquors
across custom frontier - a Central subject. It was contended that the prohibition, purchase, use,
possession and sale of liquor will affect its import. The court held that act valid because the pith
& substance fell under Entry 8 of State List and not under Entry 41 of Union List.

Principle of eclipse
The Doctrine of Eclipse says that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is not
invalid. It is not dead totally but overshadowed by the fundamental right. The inconsistency
(conflict) can be removed by constitutional amendment to the relevant fundamental right so that
eclipse vanishes and the entire law becomes valid.

9
AIR 1947 PC 60
10
AIR 1951 SC 318

9|Page
 All laws in force in India before the commencement of the Constitution shall be void in
so far they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution. Any law existing before the
commencement of the Constitution and inconsistent with the provision of Constitution becomes
inoperative on commencement of Constitution. But the law does not become dead. The law
remains a valid law in order to determine any question of law incurred before commencement of
the Constitution. An existing law only becomes eclipsed to the extend it comes under the
shadow of the FR.

Case: Bhikhaji v. State of M.P11

 In this case the provisions of Civil Procedure and Berar Motor Vehicles (Amendment)
Act 1948 authorized the State Government to take up the entire motor transport business in the
Province to the exclusion of motor transport operators. This provision though valid when
enacted, but became void on the commencement of the Constitution in 1950 as they violated
Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution. However, in 1951 Clause (6) of Article 19 was amended by
the Constitution (1st Amendment Act) so as to authorize. The Government to monopolise any
business. The Supreme Court held that the effect of the amendment was to remove the shadow
and to make the impugned Act free from blemish or infirmity. It became enforceable against
citizens as well as non-citizens after the constitutional impediment was removed. This law was
eclipsed for the time being by the fundamental rights. As soon as the eclipse is removed, the law
begins to operate from the date of such removal.

Case:  Keshavan Madhava Menon v. The State of Bombay12

In this case the law in question was an existing law at the time when the Constitution
came into force. That existing law imposed on the exercise of the right guaranteed to the citizens
of India by article 19(1)(g) restrictions which could not be justified as reasonable under clause
(6) as it then stood and consequently under article 13(1)13 that existing law became void “to the
extent of such inconsistency”.
11
AIR 1955 S.C. 781
12
[1961] S.C.R. 288
13
Article 13 (1) – All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this
Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such
inconsistency, be void.

10 | P a g e
 The court said that the law became void not in to or for all purposes or for all times or for
all persons but only “to the extent of such inconsistency”, that is to say, to the extent it
became inconsistent with the provisions of Part III which conferred the fundamental rights
on the citizens.

Thus the Doctrine of Eclipse provides for the validation of Pre-Constitution Laws that
violate fundamental rights upon the premise that such laws are not null and void ab initio but
become unenforceable only to the extent of such inconsistency with the fundamental rights. If
any subsequent amendment to the Constitution removes the inconsistency or the conflict of the
existing law with the fundamental rights, then the Eclipse vanishes and that particular law again
becomes active again.

Principle of Severeability
Doctrine of severability provides that if an enactment cannot be saved by construing it
consistent with its constitutionality, it may be seen whether it can be partly saved. Article 13 of
the Constitution of India provides for Doctrine of severability which states that-

All laws in force in India before the commencement of Constitution shall be void in so
far they are inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution.

The State shall not make any law which takes away/ shortens the rights conferred in Part
III of the Constitution ie. Fundamental Rights. Any law made in contravention of the provisions
of the Constitution shall be void and invalid. The invalid part shall be severed and declared
invalid if it is really severable. (That is, if the part which is not severed can meaningfully exist
without the severed part.) Sometimes the valid and invalid parts of the Act are so mixed up that
they cannot be separated from each other. In such cases, the entire Act will be invalid.

Case: AK Gopalan v. State of Madras14

In this case, the Supreme Court said that in case of repugnancy to the Constitution, only
the repugnant provision of the impugned Act will be void and not the whole of it, and every
attempt should be made to save as much as possible of the Act. If the omission of the invalid part
will not change the nature or the structure of the object of the legislature, it is severable. It was

14
AIR 1950 SC 27

11 | P a g e
held that except Section 14 all other sections of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 were valid,
and since Section 14 could be severed from the rest of the Act, the detention of the petitioner was
not illegal.

Case: HR Banthia v. Union of India15

In this case, the Supreme Court struck down certain provisions of the Gold Control Act,
1968 and since these were not inextricably bound up with the rest of the provisions of the Act,
the rest were held to be valid. The decision is an illustration of severability in application.

Conclusion
Constitution is the supreme and fundamental law of our country. Since it is written in the
form of a statute, the general principles of statutory interpretation are applicable to interpretation
of the constitution as well. It is important to note that the constitution itself endorses the general
principles of interpretation through Article 367(1), which states that unless the context otherwise
requires, the General Clauses Act, 1897 shall apply for the interpretation of this constitution as it
applies for the interpretation of an act of the legislature.

The letters of the constitution are fairly static and not very easy to change but the laws
enacted by the legislature reflect the current state of people and are very dynamic. To ensure that
the new laws are consistent with the basic structure of the constitution, the constitution must be
interpreted in broad and liberal manner giving affect to all its parts and the presumption must be
that no conflict or repugnancy was intended by its framers. Applying the same logic, the
provisions relating to fundamental rights have been interpreted broadly and liberally in favor of
the subject. Similarly, various legislative entries mentioned in the Union, State, and Concurrent
list have been construed liberally and widely.

15
AIR 1970 SC 1453

12 | P a g e