Internal Aids

Punctuation, Illustrations, Marginal notes, Definition

Punctuation
In England before 1850, there was no punctuation in the manuscript copy of any act which received the royal assent, therefore, the courts cannot have any regard to punctuation for construing any older act. In regards to modern Acts, it is very doubtful if punctuation can be looked for purpose of construction. IRC v. Hinchy (1960)

Aswini kumar Ghose v. Arabinda Bose Air 1952 SC 369

Punctuation, in any case, is a minor element in the construction of a statute. Only when a statute is carefully punctuated and there is no doubt about its meaning, a weight can be given to punctuation. It cannot, however, be regarded as a controlling element and cannot be allowed to control the plain the meaning of a statute.

A.K Gopalan v. State of Madras

In this case while construing Art. 22(7)(a) of the Constitution. Kania, C.J.I., referred to punctuation in reaching conclusion that Parliament was not obliged to prescribe both the circumstances under which, a class or classes of cases, in which a person could be detained for a period longer than 3 months, without obtaining the opinion of the Advisory Board.

 The use of word which twice read with the comma put after each which was relied upon as indicative of this construction. This view was later overruled in the case of Sambhu Nath Sarkar v. State of W.B

 But in would appear, at any rate, with respect to modern statutes, that if a statute in question is found to be carefully punctuated, punctuation, though a minor element, may be resorted to for the purpose of construction. In the case of Mohd. Shabir v. State of Maharashtra Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 came up for construction.

 Under this section whoever manufactures for sale, sells, stocks or exhibits for sale or distributes a drug without license, is liable for punishment. In holding that mere stocking is not an offence within this section the Supreme Court pointed out the presence of comma after manufacture for sale and sells and absence of comma after stocks. It was held that stocking for sale could amount to offence but not mere stocking.

Illustration
Illustration appended to a section form a 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. But illustration cannot have the effect of modifying the language of the section and they cannot either curtail or expand the ambit of the section.

Md Syedol Arrifin v. Yeah Oai Gark

In this case the question involved was as to the admissibility of a diary maintained by a deceased father containing dates of births, death and marriages in the family. Proof of the age of the son under section 32(5) of the Straits Settlement Ordinance,1893 which is similar as the section 32(5) of the Indian Evidence Act. 1872

 There is an illustration (b) which runs the question is, what is the date of the birth of A? A letter from the As deceased father announcing the birth A on a given day, is a relevant fact. The Privy council held the diary to be admissible on the footing that a statement as to the date of birth relates to the commencement of the relationship by blood and therefore relates to the existence of such relationship as that referred in the section 32(5). Support of this view was taken from the illustration.

 Lord Shaw in delivering the opinion observed that it is the duty of court of law to accept, if that can be done, the illustration given as being both of relevance and value in the construction of the text. The illustrations should in no case be rejected because they do not square with the ideas possibly derived from another system of jurisprudence as to the law with which they or the sections deal. And it would require a very special case to warrant their rejection on the ground of their assumed repugnancy to the section themselves. It would be a very last resort of the of construction to make this assumption. The great usefulness of illustrations which have, although not part of the sections, been expressly furnished by the Legislature as helpful in working and application of the statute.

 The utility of Illustration in interpreting the section cannot, however detract the prime importance of the language of the section which is the enacting provision. Illustration therefore, cannot, have the effect of controlling the real content of the section and must give way in case of repugnance with the text of the section.

Marginal Note
The marginal note to a section cannot be referred to for the purpose of construing the section but it can certainly be relied upon as indicating the drift of the section or to show what the section is dealing with. It cannot control the interpretation of the words of a section, particularly when the language of the section is clear and unambiguous but, being part of the statute, it prima facie furnishes some clue as to the meaning and purpose of the section. Nandini Satpathy v. P.C Dani

Bengal Immunity v. State of Bihar

It was held that Marginal notes appended to the Articles of the Constitution are a part of the Constitution as passed by the Constituent Assembly and therefore they have been made use of in construing the Articles e.g Art 286, as furnishing prima facie, some clue to the meaning and purpose of the Article.