Introduction
The Constitution of India was enacted on January 26, 1950. Constitution of India was drafted, enacted and approved by the Constituent Assembly on behalf of the people of India. A statute has a tendency towards the legislature which is delivered in the form of text. Interpretation or construction of a statute is a long process and as old as language. It is a long-established principle of law that as the statute is an edict of the Legislature, the standard way of interpreting or construing a statute is to seek the intention of the legislature.
However, the essential requirement of interpretation would arise only where the language of a statutory provision is equivocal. Often debate of the Constituent Assembly is referred for interpretation of the Constitution. To certify that the new laws are consistent with the basic structure of the constitution, the constitution must be explained in a broad and liberal manner giving effect to all its parts.
There are three kinds of interpretation of the constitution.
Historical Interpretation
Ambiguities and uncertainties while explaining the constitutional provisions can be cleared by referring to earlier interpretative decisions.
Contemporary Interpretation
The Constitution must be explained according to the present circumstances. The current scenario must be considered.
Harmonious Construction
It is a fundamental rule of construction that when there are in an act two provisions which are in such conflict with each other, that both of them cannot stand together, they should simply be explained that effect can be given to both.
General Rules of Interpretation of the Constitution
The words are clear and unambiguous and they must be given the full effect. The constitution must be read as a whole. The Constitution must be explained in a literal and broad sense. Principles of harmonious construction must be applied. The court has to infer the soul of the Constitution from the language. The Constitution wins over other statutes. Internal and External support may be used while describing.
Principles of Constitutional Interpretation
Following are the principles for interpreting the Constitution:
Principle of eclipse
The doctrine states that if any law opposes the fundamental rights, then it becomes inactive. As soon as that fundamental right is removed from the Constitution, the inactive law becomes revived. When a court hit a part of the law, it becomes unenforceable. Hence, an ‘eclipse’ is said to be toss on it. The law just becomes invalid but still it continues to exist. The eclipse is removed when another makes the law valid again. Supreme Court first applied to pre-constitutional law doctrine in the case of Bhikaji vs State of Madhya Pradesh. The doctrine for post-constitutional law was stated in the case of Dulare Lodh vs ADJ Kanpur.
Principle of colorable legislation
The doctrine of colorable legislation in India 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 made offense of those powers. So, the doctrine becomes applicable whenever legislation seeks to try and 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 can’t be done directly doesn’t arise.
Principle of pith and substance
This doctrine comes into picture when there’s a conflict between the various subjects in several lists. There is an interpretation of List one and List two of the Constitution of India.
There can be a situation when a subject of one list touche the subject of another List. Hence, the application of this doctrine happens. Pith and Substance means the true nature of law.
Principle of Severability
The doctrine of severability gives that if a validification can’t be saved via construing it according to its constitutionality, it’s going to be seen whether it is often partly saved. Article 13 of the Constitution of India explains for Doctrine of severability which defines that-All laws which are effective in India before the commencement of Constitution shall be void in thus far they’re incompatible with the provisions of the Constitution. The State shall not create any law which takes away/ shortens the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution i.e. Fundamental Rights.
Any law made in contradiction of the provisions of the Constitution shall be void and invalid. The invalid part shall be severed and declared invalid if it’s really severable. (That is, if the part which isn’t severed can meaningfully exist without the severed part.) Sometimes involvement of the valid and invalid parts of the Act is so much that they aren’t separable from each other. In such cases, the whole Act is going to be invalid.
Principle of implied powers
Laws that are necessary and proper for the execution of the facility or for accompanying such power are implied powers; and these laws are presumably constitutional. In other words, constitutional powers are granted generally terms out of which implied powers must necessarily arise. Likewise, constitutional restraints are put generally terms out of which implied restraints must also necessarily establish. This is a judicial principle which states that, generally, the rights and duties of a legislative body or organization are determined from its functions and purposes as laid out in its constitution and developed in practice.
Principle of territorial nexus
Article 245 states that a state legislature can make laws on the territory of the state and not on extraterritorial laws provided there is nexus or connection between the sate and the object of the legislation. Article 245(1) states that the Parliament of India can make laws for the entire or any territory of India. Similarly, a state legislature can do the same. Such laws can’t be declared invalid on the expansion that they’re extraterritorial consistent with Article 245(2). To determine whether a specific legislation is within the territorial nexus or not, this doctrine is applied. Supreme Court applied this doctrine within the case of Tata Iron Steel vs. the State of Bihar.
Conclusion
Constitutional interpretation is a task that needs a precise understanding of the mindset of the framers along with the common law principles. Constitution is the grundnorm or in layman term a manual to run a country. Constitution gives the identity of a country, hence its interpretation is a task that requires special skills and knowledge.
0 Comments