Published on: 19 October 2022 at 10:45 IST
Court – Supreme Court of India
Citation – New Delhi Municipal Council v/s Minosha (India) Ltd. (2022) 8 SCC 384
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that Courts has held that interpretation of statues must accommodate the objective of the law for which the statues was created by the legislature.
It is held that the Hon’ble Court may even go to the extent of leaving out a word or not giving effect to certain part in order to give full meaning to the law by way of gleaning and giving effect to the intention of the legislature.
Para – 26
The principles of interpretation of statutes have been invoked in the varying contexts and are to be applied on the basis of the facts of the case, the nature of the law and a host of principles. Undoubtedly, the golden rule of interpretation is the interpretation which thrives on the ordinary meaning of the words as they are used.
This principle of literal interpretation of statutes has over a period of time indeed yielded to an interpretation which is purposive or which seeks to accommodate the object of the law giver. Suffice it to say that if the words of a statute are not ambiguous, the scope of interpretation dwindles.
It is not for the Court to rewrite a statute. There may be occasions where the Court may even go to the extent of leaving out a word or not giving effect to certain part in order to give full meaning to the law by way of gleaning and giving effect to the intention of the legislature.
The principle that literal meaning must be accepted is undoubtedly subject to the principle that it will make way when such interpretation will lead to an absurdity or grave injustice which a law giver could not have contemplated.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
Key Words – Interpretation, Statues, Legislation.