Q. What do you mean by Internal and External aids to construction?
INTERNAL AIDS
Laws enacted by the legislatures are interpreted by the judiciary. Enacted laws, specially the modern Acts and Rules, are
drafted by legal experts and it could be expected that the language will leave little room for interpretation or
construction. But the experience of all who have to hear and share the task of application of law, has been different. It is
quite often observed that courts are busy unfolding the meaning of ambiguous words and expressions and resolving in
consistencies. The age-old process of the application of the enacted laws has led to formulation of certain rules of
interpretation or construction.
The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in
the language used. In Santi Swarup Sarkar v. Pradeep Kumar Sarkar, the Supreme Court held that if two interpretations
are possible of the same statute, the one which validates the statute must be preferred.
Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of interpretation:
1. Literal Interpretation
2. Logical Interpretation
Internal Aids of Interpretation are:
A. Long Title: It is now settled that Long Title of an Act is a part of the Act and is admissible as an aid to its construction.
The long title which often precedes the preamble must be distinguished with the short title; the former taken along with
the preamble or even in its absence is a good guide regarding the object, scope or purpose of the Act, whereas the latter
341 being only an abbreviation for purposes of reference is not a useful aid to construction.
B. Preamble: The preamble of a statute like the long title is a part of the Act and is an admissible aid to construction.
Although not an enacting part, the preamble is expected to express the scope, object and purpose of the Act more
comprehensively than the long title. It may recite the ground and cause of making the statute, the evils sought to be
remedied or the doubts which may be intended to be settled. In the words of Sir John Nicholl : It is to the preamble more
specifically that we are to look for the reason or spirit of every statute, rehearsing this, as it ordinarily does, the evils
sought to be remedied, or the doubts purported to be removed by the statute, and so evidencing, in the best and most
satisfactory manner, the object or intention of the Legislature in making or passing the statute itself.
C. Preamble to Constitution: The Preamble of the Constitution like the Preamble of any statute furnishes the key to open
the mind of the makers of the Constitution more so because the Constituent Assembly took great pains in formulating it
so that it may reflect the essential features and basic objectives of the Constitution. The Preamble is a part of the
Constitution The Preamble embodies the fundamentals underlining the structure of the Constitution. It was adopted by
the Constituent Assembly after the entire Constitution has been adopted.
The true functions of the Preamble is to expound the nature and extend and application of the powers actually confirmed
by the Constitution and not substantially to create them. The Constitution, including the Preamble, must be read as a
whole and in case of doubt interpreted consistent with its basic structure to promote the great objectives stated in the
preamble. But the Preamble can neither be regarded as the source of any substantive power nor as a source of any
prohibition or limitation.
D. Headings: The view is now settled that the Headings or Titles prefixed to sections or group of sections can be referred
to in construing an Act of the Legislature. But conflicting opinions have been expressed on the question as to what weight
should be attached to the headings. A Heading•, according to one view, is to be regarded as giving the key to the
interpretation of the clauses ranged under it, unless the wording is inconsistent with such interpretation; and so the
headings might be treated as preambles to the provisions following them.
E. Marginal Notes: In the older statutes marginal notes were not inserted by the legislature and hence were not part of
the statute and could not be referred to for the purpose of construing the statute. If they are also enacted by the
legislature they can be referred to for the purpose of interpretation. In the case of the Indian Constitution, the marginal
notes have been enacted by the Constituent Assembly and hence they may be referred to for interpreting the Articles of
the Constitution. If the words used in the enactment are clear and unambiguous, the marginal note cannot control the
meaning, but in case of ambiguity or doubt, the marginal note may be referred to.
F. Punctuation: Punctuation means to mark with points and to make points with usual stops. It is the art of dividing
sentences by point or mark. Is the Court entitled to use punctuation also while interpreting the statutes? Punctuation is
considered as a minor element in the construction of statutes.
G. Illustrations: Illustrations appended to a section from part of the statute and although forming no part of the section,
are of relevance and value in the construction of the text of the section and they should not be readily rejected as
repugnant to the section. It would be the very last resort of construction to make this assumption. The great usefulness of
the Illustrations which have, although not part of the sections, been expressly furnished by the Legislature as helpful in
the working and application of the statute, should not be thus impaired.
H. Definition Section: These do not take away the ordinary and natural meaning of the words, but as used: (i) to extend
the meaning of a word to include or cover something, which would not normally be covered or included; and (ii) to
interpret ambiguous words and words which are not plain or clear.
I. Proviso: The proper function of a proviso is to except and to deal with a case which would otherwise fall within the
general language of the main enactment and its effect is confined to that case. It is a qualification of the preceding
enactment which is expressed in terms too general to be quite accurate. As a general rule, a proviso is added to an
enactment to qualify or create an exception to what is in the enactment and ordinarily, a proviso is not interpreted as
stating a general rule. Normally, a proviso does not travel beyond the provision to which it is a proviso. It craves out an
exception to the main provision to which it has been enacted as a proviso and to no other.
J. Explanation: The object of an Explanation to a statutory provision is –
1. To explanation the meaning and intendment of the Act itself,
2. Where there is any obscurity or vagueness in the main enactment, to clarify the same so as to make it consistent with
the dominant object which it seems to sub serve,
3. To provide an additional support to the dominant object of the Act in order to make it meaningful and purposeful,
4. An Explanation cannot in any way interfere with or change the enactment or any part thereof but where some gap is
left which is relevant for the purpose of the Explanation, in order to suppress the mischief and advance the object of the
Act it can help or assist the court in interpreting the true purport and intendment of the enactment, and
5. It cannot, however, take away a statutory right with which any person under a statute has been clothed or set at
naught the working of an Act by becoming a hindrance in the interpretation of the same.
EXTERNAL AIDS
When internal aids are not adequate, court has to take recourse to External aids. External Aids may be parliamentary
material, historical background, reports of a committee or a commission, official statement, dictionary meanings, foreign
decisions, etc. In Prabhakar Rao and others v. State of A.P. and others, AIR 1986 SC 120, O. Chennappa, Reddy J. has
observed: Where internal aids are not forthcoming, we can always have recourse to external aids to discover the object of
the legislation. External aids are not ruled out. This is now a well settled principle of modern statutory construction.
A. Parliamentary History, Historical Facts and Surrounding Circumstances: Historical setting cannot be used as an aid if
the words are plain and clear. If the wordings are ambiguous, the historical setting may be considered in order to arrive at
the proper construction. Historical setting covers parliamentary history, historical facts, statement of objects and reasons,
report of expert committees. Recently, the Supreme Court in R. Chaudhuri v State of Punjab and others, (2001) 7 SCC
126, has stated that it is a settled position that debates in the Constituent Assembly may be relied upon as an aid to
interpret a Constitutional provision because it is the function of the Court to find out the intention of the framers of the
Constitution.
B. Social, Political and Economic Developments and Scientific Inventions: A Statute must be interpreted to include
circumstances or situations which were unknown or did not exist at the time of enactment of the statute. Any relevant
changes in the social conditions and technology should be given due weightage. Courts should take into account all these
developments while construing statutory provisions.
In P. Gupta v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149, it was stated – The interpretation of every statutory provision must keep
pace with changing concepts and values and it must, to the extent to which its language permits or rather does not
prohibit, suffer adjustments through judicial interpretation so as to accord with the requirement of the fast changing
society which is undergoing rapid social and economic transformation.
C. Reference to Other Statutes: In case where two Acts have to be read together, then each part of every act has to be
construed as if contained in one composite Act. However, if there is some clear discrepancy then the latter Act would
modify the earlier. Where a single provision of one Act has to be read or added in another, then it has to be read in the
sense in which it was originally construed in the first Act. In this way the whole of the first Act can be mentioned or
referred in the second Act even though only a provision of the first one was adopted.
In case where an old Act has been repealed, it loses its operative force. Nevertheless, such a repealed part may
still be taken into account for construing the unrepealed part. For the purpose of interpretation or construction of a
statutory provision, courts can refer to or can take help of other statutes. It is also known as statutory aids. The General
Clauses Act, 1897 is an example of statutory aid. The application of this rule of construction has the merit of avoiding any
contradiction between a series of statutes dealing with the same subject, it allows the use of an earlier statute to throw
light on the meaning of a phrase used in a later statute in the same context.
On the same logic when words in an earlier statute have received an authoritative exposition by a superior court,
use of same words in similar context in a later statute will give rise to a presumption that the legislature intends that the
same interpretation should be followed for construction of those words in the later statute.
D. Dictionaries: When a word is not defined in the statute itself, it is permissible to refer to dictionaries to find out the
general sense in which that word is understood in common parlance. However, in the selection of one out of the various
meanings of a word, regard must always be had to the scheme, context and legislative history.
E. Judicial Decisions: When judicial pronouncements are been taken as reference it should be taken into note that the
decisions referred are Indian, if they are foreign it should be ensured that such a foreign country follows the same system
of jurisprudence as ours and that these decisions have been taken in the ground of the same law as ours. These foreign
decisions have persuasive value only and are not binding on Indian courts and where guidance is available from binding
Indian decisions; reference to foreign decisions is of no use.
F. Other Materials: Similarly, Supreme Court used information available on internet for the purpose of interpretation of
statutory provision in Ramlal v. State of Rajasthan, (2001) 1 SCC 175. Courts also refer passages and materials from text
books and articles and papers published in the journals. These external aids are very useful tools not only for the proper
and correct interpretation or construction of statutory provision, but also for understanding the object of the statute, the
mischief sought to be remedied by it, circumstances in which it was enacted and many other relevant matters. In the
absence of the admissibility of these external aids, sometimes court may not be in a position to do justice in a case.
