This document discusses various aids that judges use when interpreting statutes, including both intrinsic (internal) aids found within the statute as well as extrinsic (external) aids outside the statute. Some key intrinsic aids discussed are other provisions and context within the act, the title, preamble, headings, marginal notes, provisos, definitions, exceptions, schedules, and illustrations. External aids include parliamentary history, historical facts, subsequent developments, reference to other statutes, contemporary opinion, policy behind the act, precedent, and dictionaries. The document provides examples of different intrinsic aids like definitions, exceptions, and illustrations used in the Indian Penal Code to help interpret provisions. It emphasizes that the intention of the legislature and circumstances around an

1. Aids of Interpretation

2. External Aid
1. Parliamentary History
2. Historical Facts &
Surrounding circumstances
3. Later Social, Economic, Political
developments and Scientific Inventions.
4. Reference to other Statues.
5. Contemporary opinion

3. 6Policy Behind the Act
7. Precedent
8. Use of Dictionaries
9. Use of Foreign Decision
10. Subtraction & Insertion of words
11. Use of General Clause Act

4. Historical perspective behind enactment of an Act
provides useful guide for interpretation.
Old Act , its jurisdiction, objects and reasons for
enactments,
typical language used therein all invite one to go
down in past
and refer to historical backdrop.
Ruling (1960-SC):- Interpretation of “ BASIC WAGES
“
u/s 2(B) of Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952,
SUPREME COURT referred history.

5. INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AIDS
• There is a wide range of material
that may be considered by a judge
when interpreting statutes. Some of
these aids may be found within the
statute in question, others are
external to the statute.
• They are also known as intrinsic and
extrinsic aids.

6. Intrinsic aids
• Intrinsic aids are sources within the
Act (internal aids).
• In order to determine the meaning of
a section of an Act of Parliament, the
judge may wish to look at other
sections in the Act.

7. 1. Context
• If the words of a statute are ambiguous then
the context must be taken into consideration.
• The context includes other provisions of the
statute, its preamble, the existing state of
law and other legal provisions.
• The intention behind the meaning of the
words and the circumstances under which
they are framed must be considered.

8. 2. Title
Long title
• The heading of the statute is the long title and the general
purpose is described in it.
• E.g. Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, the long
title reads as follows “An Act to make provisions for the
prevention of adulteration of food”.
Short Title
• The short title of the Act is purely for reference only. The
short title is merely for convenience.
• E.g. The Indian Penal Code, 1860.

9. 3.Preamble
• The Act Starts with a preamble and
is generally small. The main objective and
purpose of the Act are found in the Preamble of
the Statute.
• “Preamble is the Act in a nutshell. It is a
preparatory statement.
• It contains the recitals showing the reason for
enactment of the Act.
• If the language of the Act is clear the preamble
must be ignored.

10. 4.Headings
• A group of Sections are given under a heading
which act as their preamble.
• Sometimes a single section might have a
preamble.
• S.378-441 of IPC is “Offences against property”.
Headings are prefixed to sections. They are
treated as preambles. If there is ambiguity in the
words of a statute, headings can be referred.

11. 5. Marginal notes
• Marginal notes are the notes that are printed
at the side of the section in an Act and it
summarizes the effect of the section.
• They are not part of the statute. So they must
not be considered. But if there is any
ambiguity they may be referred only as an
internal aid to the construction.

12. 6. Proviso
• A proviso merely carves out something from the
section itself.
• A proviso is a subsidiary to the main section and
has to be construed in the light of the section
itself.
• General rule on Proviso is - it Limits the ambit of
the section, which it qualifies.
• If proviso contradicts main enactment, then
proviso prevails as it speaks the last intention of
the legislature. However attempt to reconcile
both should be made first.
• E.g. IPC S. 300 Exception – 1 & Proviso 1 to 3.

13. 7. Definition/ Interpretation clause
• The legislature can lay down legal definitions
of its own language, if such definitions are
embodied in the statute itself, it becomes
binding on the courts.
• When the act itself provides a dictionary
for the words used, the court must first look
into that dictionary for interpretation.

14. 8. Conjunctive and Disjunctive words
• The word “and” is conjunctive and the word
“or” is disjunctive. These words are often
interchangeable.
• The word ‘and’ can be read as ‘or’ and ‘or’ can
be read as ‘and’.

15. 9. Gender
• Words’ using the masculine gender is deemed
to include females too.

16. 10. Punctuation
• Punctuation is disregarded in the construction
of a statute.
• Punctuation cannot control, vary or modify
the plain and simple meaning of the language
of the statute.

17. 11. Explanations
• In certain provisions of an Act explanations
may be needed when doubts arise as to
the meaning of the particular section.
• Explanations are given at the end of each
section and it is part and parcel of the
enactment.
• E.g. IPC S. 299 Explanation 1 to 3

18. 12. Exceptions and savings clause
• To exempt certain clauses from the preview of the main provisions,
and exception clause is provided.
• The things which are not exempted fall within the purview of the
main enactment.
• The saving clause is also added in cases of repeal and re-enactment
of a statute.
Example of Exceptions :- (1) IPC S. 76 to 105
• (2) IPC S. 300 Exception 1 to 5
• Saving clauses are appended in cases of repeal and re- enactment
of a Statute to ensure the continuation of past rights.
Example:-
(1) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 S. 29 (1 to 4)
(2) Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 S. 30

19. 13. Schedules
• Schedules form part of a statute.
• They are at the end and contain minute details for
working out the provisions of the express enactment.
• The expression in the schedule cannot override the
provisions of the express enactment.
• Inconsistency between schedule and the Act, the
Act prevails.
• E.g.(1) Constitution of India. Schedule 1 to 12.
(2) I.D. Act - Schedule 1 to 5.

20. 14. Illustrations
• Illustrations in enactment provided by the
legislature are valuable aids in the
understanding the real scope.
• IPC is full of Illustrations.

21. Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or—
Secondly.—If it is done with the intention of causing such bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person to whom the harm is
caused, or—
Thirdly.—If it is done with the intention of causing bodily injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be inflicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of
nature to cause death, or—
Fourthly.—If the person committing the act knows that it is so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death or such bodily injury as is likely
to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.
Illustrations
• (a) A shoots Z with the intention of killing him. Z dies in consequence. A commits murder.
• (b) A, knowing that Z is labouring under such a disease that a blow is likely to cause his death, strikes him with the intention of causing bodily injury. Z dies
in consequence of the blow. A is guilty of murder, although the blow might not have been sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of
a person in a sound state of health. But if A, not knowing that Z is labouring under any disease, gives him such a blow as would not in the ordinary course
of nature kill a person in a sound state of health, here A, although he may intend to cause bodily injury, is not guilty of murder, if he did not intend to
cause death, or such bodily injury as in the ordinary course of nature would cause death.
• (c) A intentionally gives Z a sword-cut or club-wound sufficient to cause the death of a man in the ordinary course of nature. Z dies in consequence. Here,
A is guilty of murder, although he may not have intended to cause Z’s death.
• (d) A without any excuse fires a loaded cannon into a crowd of persons and kills one of them. A is guilty of murder, although he may not have had a
premeditated design to kill any particular individual.
• Exception 1.—When culpable homicide is not murder.—Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst deprived of the power of self-control by
grave and sudden provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the provocation or causes the death of any other person by mistake or accident.
• The above exception is subject to the following provisos:—
• First.—That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily provoked by the offender as an excuse for killing or doing harm to any person.
• Secondly.—That the provocation is not given by anything done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the lawful exercise of the powers of such
public servant.
• Thirdly.—That the provocation is not given by anything done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence.
• Explanation
• Whether the provocation was grave and sudden enough to prevent the offence from amounting to murder is a question of fact.
• Illustrations
• (a) A, under the influence of passion excited by a provocation given by Z, intentionally kills. Y, Z’s child. This is murder, in as much as the provocation was
not given by the child, and the death of the child was not caused by accident or misfortune in doing an act caused by the provocation.
• (b) Y gives grave and sudden provocation to A. A, on this provocation, fires a pistol at Y, neither intending nor knowing himself to be likely to kill Z, who is
near him, but out of sight. A kills Z. Here A has not committed murder, but merely culpable homicide.
• (c) A is lawfully arrested by Z, a bailiff. A is excited to sudden and violent passion by the arrest, and kills Z. This is murder, in as much as the provocation
was given by a thing done by a public servant in the exercise of his powers.
• (d) A appears as witness before Z, a Magistrate, Z says that he does not believe a word of A’s deposition, and that A has perjured himself. A is moved to
sudden passion by these words, and kills Z. This is murder.
• (e) A attempts to pull Z’s nose, Z, in the exercise of the right of private defence, lays hold of A to prevent him from doing so. A is moved to sudden and
violent passion in consequence, and kills Z. This is murder, in as much as the provocation was given by a thing done in the exercise of the right of private
defence.
• (f) Z strikes B. B is by this provocation excited to violent rage. A, a bystander, intending to take advantage of B’s rage, and to cause him to kill Z, puts a
knife into B’s hand for that purpose. B kills Z with the knife. Here B may have committed only culpable homicide, but A is guilty of murder.
•

22. • S.300:
Except in the cases hereinafter excepted, culpable homicide is
murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with
the intention of causing death, or—
Secondly.—If it is done with the intention of causing such
bodily injury as the offender knows to be likely to cause the
death of the person to whom the harm is caused, or—
Thirdly.—If it is done with the intention of causing bodily
injury to any person and the bodily injury intended to be in-
flicted is sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause
death, or—
Fourthly.—If the person committing the act knows that it is so
imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause
death or such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and
commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk
of causing death or such injury as aforesaid.

23. Exception 1.—When culpable homicide is not murder.—
Culpable homicide is not murder if the offender, whilst
deprived of the power of self-control by grave and sudden
provocation, causes the death of the person who gave the
provocation or causes the death of any other person by
mistake or accident.
The above exception is subject to the following provisos:—
• First.—That the provocation is not sought or voluntarily
provoked by the offender as an excuse for killing or doing
harm to any person.
• Secondly.—That the provocation is not given by anything
done in obedience to the law, or by a public servant in the
lawful exercise of the powers of such public servant.
• Thirdly.—That the provocation is not given by anything
done in the lawful exercise of the right of private defence.

24. • Consolidated Act
• Definition of :
(1) Act (6) India
(2) Affidavit / Oath (7) Indian Law
(3) Central Government (8) Person
(4) Document (9) State
Government
(5) Immovable / Moveable Property (10) Local
Authority
• S-6 Effects of Repeal of Act
•
• S-13 ‘ Masculine Gender ’ & ‘Singular’
• S-16 Power of Appointment
• Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904.