Intent of Law: Understanding Legislative Interpretation

•

"INTENT OF LAW" Please save this post for future use. We often want to frame the defence that the Legislative Intent/Object of Legislation was "X" and the view of the Department is "Y". Let's dive deep into this argument. Research by: Raja Abhishek, NIRC Candidate 2024

1. The argument of defective draftsmanship should be accepted as the last resort. A contention that the Legislature intended to bring about it has failed to do by reason of defective draftsmanship is one which can only be accepted in the last resort,

where there is no avenue left for escape from that conclusion. Supreme Court in M.P.V. Sundararmier vs State of Andhra Pradesh [(1958) SCR 1422 :: AIR 1958 SC 468]

2. When a Rule is capable of any interpretation, then the Supreme Court should give it an interpretation that would serve the Legislative intent and the object of framing such Rules. (Para 28) Supreme Court in Avishek Goenka vs Union of India (2012) 5 SCC 321 :: AIR 2012 SC 2226

3. The object of legislation is to provide a remedy for an existing issue, while legislative intention is derived from the meaning of the enacted remedy.

To determine the purpose of legislation, it is permissible to examine the circumstances at the time of its enactment, including the 'Statement of Objects and Reasons', which highlights the need for the legislation. Supreme Court in State of H.P. vs Kailash Chand Mahajan

AIR 1992 SC 1277 :: 1992 Supp (2) SCC 351 :: 1992 SCC (L&S) 874 :: (1992) 21 ATC 528

4. The Rule of Law must run close to the Rule of Life and the Court must read into an enactment, language permitting, that meaning which promotes the benignant intent of legislation in preference to one which perverts the scheme of the Statute on imputed legislative presumptions

and assumed social values in a prior era. Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs Amar Singh (1974) 2 SCC 70 :: AIR 1974 SC 994 Thanks Raja Abhishek Your own Candidate for NIRC