Retrospective Operation of Statutes (with special reference to Penal Laws)

Interpretation of Statutes
[A Statute is retrospective which takes away or impairs any vested right acquired under existing law, or creates a new obligation, or imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect to transactions or considerations already past says !raies in his book "Statute #aw$ %th edition&'

Sahil Ahmad, ()*+&A& ##+*,-, .aculty of #aw, /amia 0illia Islamia, 1ew 2elhi&

CONTENTS

S.no 1. Acknowledgement 2. 3. 4. ". %. 7.

Title

Page no. 3 4 " 1$ 14 1% 1*

Introduction Concept Of Retro pecti!e Operation Of Statute #eneral Principle Of Retro pecti!e Operation Of Statute Retro pecti!e Operation Of Penal Statute Conclu ion &i'liograp()

345age

Acknowledgement
T(e pro+ect on t(i topic of Interpretation of Statutes wa a c(allenging ta k. T(e complication in!ol!ed in t(e u'+ect i of immen e magnitude. Interpretation of Statute 'eing t(e ole of t(e legal ) tem (elp in t(e application of ,aw in factual ituation i !ital in t(e making of a good ,aw)er. -ence doing a pro+ect of uc( magnitude re.uire guidance ') t(e u'+ect teac(er. T(e enlig(tening e/perience pro!ided ') m) teac(er Dr. Mohd. Usman Qazi pro!e to 'e a continue guiding ource in t(i endea!or. I owe (im incere gratitude0 for (i untiring and con tant academic and intellectual upport. -i in piration tickle down e!er) ner!e in our ) tem. I would al o like to take due cogni1ance of t(e effort of m) cla mate w(o upport me and alwa) (elp me in e!er) wa) t(e) can.

1. INTRODUCTION
645age

T(e operation of tatute i of two t)pe 0 i.e. t(e Pro pecti!e operation w(ic( eek to go!ern current acti!itie 0 e!ent 2 t(e Retro pecti!e operation of tatute w(ic( eek to go!ern pa t act 0 e!ent a to impair an e/i ting rig(t or o'ligation. T(e u e of e/pre ion retro pecti!e operation of tatute i at time !ague 2 mi leading. In a 'road en e it ma) 'e rig(t to a) t(at tatute (a enactment retro pecti!e operation w(en it purport to touc( fact or e!ent w(ic( took place 'efore t(e enactment come in to force it i ometime u ed in different en e w(en !e ted rig(t are oug(t to 'e affected . it i ome time loo el) u ed in conte/t of certain function of law w(ic( t(e law maker deem it nece ar) to introduce in e/i ting law for t(e purpo e of etting certain matter rig(t or a!oiding certain mi c(ief w(ic( mig(t po i'le 'ut for c(ange in law3 2t(i i done ') la)ing down t(at certain fact or t(ing w(ic( did not e/i t fact e/i t (all 'e deemed to (a!e e/i ted. In t(i pro+ect I (a!e di cu ed concept of retro pecti!e operation of tatute 0 general principal relating to retro pecti!e operation of tatute 2 retro pecti!it) of ot(er tatute wit( pecial reference to penal law tatute wit( t(e (elp of recent ca e law 2 wit( reference to ome 'a ic rule enunciated ') prominent aut(or on t(e con truction of tatute .

2. CONCEPT OF RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION OF STATUTES

T(e word 4retro pecti!e5 i omew(at am'iguou . It literall) mean looking 'ackward 3 (a!ing reference to a tate of t(ing e/i ting 'efore t(e Act in .ue tion. A retro pecti!e tatute contemplate t(e pa t and gi!e to a pre!iou tran action ome different legal effect from t(at w(ic( it (ad under t(e law w(en it occurred or tran pired. A statute is to be deemed retrospective which takes away or impairs any vested right acquired under existing laws, or creates a new obligation, or imposes a new duty, or attaches a new disability in respect of transactions or considerations already past. In Fr nc!" #enn!on$" Statutor) Interpretation0 2nd 6dition 0 t(e tatement of ,aw i tated a follow 7 8T(e e ential idea of legal ) tem i t(at current law (ould go!ern current acti!itie . 6l ew(ere in t(i work a particular Act i likened to a floodlig(t witc(ed on or off0 and t(e general 'od) of law to t(e circumam'ient air. Clum ) t(oug( t(e e image are0 t(e) (ow t(e inappropriatene of retro pecti!e law . If we do omet(ing toda)0 we feel t(at t(e law appl)ing to it (ould 'e t(e law in force toda)0 not tomorrow9 'ackward ad+u tment of it. Suc(0 we 'elie!e0 i t(e nature of law. :i like of e/;po t facto law i en (rined in t(e <nited State Con titution and in t(e Con titution of man) American State 0 w(ic( for'id it. T(e true principle i t(at le/ pro picit non re picit =law look forward not 'ack>. A ?ille 0 @. aid retro pecti!e legi lation i 9contrar) to t(e general principle t(at legi lation ') w(ic( t(e conduct of mankind i to 'e regulated oug(t0 w(en introduced for t(e fir t
-45age

time0 to deal wit( future act 0 and oug(t not to c(ange t(e c(aracter of pa t tran action carried on upon t(e fait( of t(e t(en e/i ting law. In % &well on t(e Interpretation of Statute 0 12t( 6dition0 t(e tatement of law in t(i regard i tated t(u 7 8Per(ap no rule of con truction i more firml) e ta'li (ed t(an t(u ; t(at a retro pecti!e operation i not to 'e gi!en to a tatute o a to impair an e/i ting rig(t or o'ligation0 ot(erwi e t(an a regard matter of procedure0 unle t(at effect cannot 'e a!oided wit(out doing !iolence to t(e language of t(e enactment. If t(e enactment i e/pre ed in language w(ic( i fairl) capa'le of eit(er interpretation0 it oug(t to 'e con trued a pro pecti!e onl). T(e rule (a 0 in fact0 two a pect 0 for it0 8in!ol!e anot(er and u'ordinate rule0 to t(e effect t(at a tatute i not to 'e con trued o a to (a!e a greater retro pecti!e operation t(an it language render nece ar).A It i well ettled t(at t(e <nion a well a t(e State ,egi lature (a!e plenar) power of legi lation and can legi late pro pecti!el) a well a retro pecti!el) Hajee Abdul Shukoor & Co. vs. State of Madras in t(i ca e court o' er!e t(at Suc( retro pecti!e legi lation ma) eit(er 'e made ') e/pre word or ') nece ar) intendment. It0 t(erefore0 depend on t(e wording of t(e tatute0 w(ere e/pre word do not e/i t0 w(et(er ') nece ar) intendment retro pecti!el) (ould 'e inferred and (ow far 'ackward . Pro pecti!e or retro pecti!e #eneral rule of con truing tatute to (a!e pro pecti!e effect 6/ception to It doe not appl) to di .ualif)ing0 curati!e or clarificator) tatute If on a plain or literal reading legi lati!e intendment i clear t(at it i to (a!e retro pecti!e effect and it doe not produce an) a' urdit) or am'iguit) t(ere')0 court will gi!e effect t(ereto Statute w(ic( take awa) a rig(t under t(e e/i ting law i retro pecti!e in nature Statute enacted for t(e 'enefit of t(e communit) a a w(ole ma) 'e con trued to (a!e retro pecti!e operation. A per a popular .uote7 As a eneral rule! ever" statute is deemed to be #ros#e$tive! unless b" e%#ress #rovision or ne$essar" im#li$ation it is to have a retros#e$tive effe$t.& In #.P. S' nker (". St te o) UP =AIR 1B"B AlA. -C > -ig( Court (eld t(at intention of legi lation i mo t important argument to determine t(e retro pecti!e operation of tatue if it e/pre l) pro!ide for retro pecti!e operation t(en effect mu t 'e gi!en to ame ot(erwi e not. #!n * +,m r %o' nt! (". U P - AIR 1BC1 Ori a -C.In t(i ca e Ori a (ig( court (ea!il) relied upon intention of legi lation 2 regarded a foundation to gat(er t(e intention of legi lator a'out retro pecti!e operation of t(e tatute .

/. 0ENERA1 PRINCIP1ES OF RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION OF STATUTES

,45age

I. PO2ER TO %A+E RETROSPECTIVE 1A2S3 T(e <nion Parliament and State ,egi lature (a!e plenar) power of legi lation wit(in t(e field a igned to t(em and u'+ect to certain con titutional and +udiciall) recogni1ed re triction 92 can legi late pro pecti!el) a well a retro pecti!el). Competence to make a law for a pa t period on a u'+ect depend upon pre ent competence to legi late on t(at u'+ect. &) retro pecti!e legi lation0 t(e ,egi lature ma) make a law w(ic( i operati!e for a limited period prior to t(e date of it coming into force and i not operati!e eit(er o( t(at date or in future 3. T(e power to make retro pecti!e legi lation ena'le t(e ,egi lature to o'literate an amending Act completel) and re tore t(e law a it e/i ted 'efore t(e amending Act.4T(i power (a al o 'een often u ed for !alidating prior e/ecuti!e and legi lati!e act ') retro pecti!el) curing t(e defect w(ic( led to t(eir in!alidit) and t(u e!en making ineffecti!e +udgment of competent court declaring t(e in!alidit). It i not nece ar) t(at t(e in!alidit) mu t 'e cured ') t(e ame ,egi lature w(ic( (ad pa ed t(e earlier in!alid Act. T(u if a tate ,egi lature pa e an Act u'+ect w(ic( fail out ide it competence and wit(in t(e competence of Parliament and i for t(at rea on (eld in!alid0 Parliament can ') pa ing retro pecti!e Act w(ic( incorporate t(e State Act cure t(e in!alidit) ."

II. STATUTES DEA1IN0 2IT4 SU#STANTIVE RI04TS3 It i a cardinal principle con truction t(at e!er) tatute i prima facie pro pecti!e unle it i e/pre l) or ') nece ar) implication made to (a!e retro pecti!e operation.% &ut t(e rule in general i applica'le w(ere t(e o'+ect of t(e tatute i to affect !e ted rig(t or to impo e new 'urden or to impair 6/i ting o'ligation . <nle t(ere are word in t(e tatute ufficient to (ow t(e intention of t(e ,egi lature to affect e/i ting rig(t 0 it i 8deemed to 'e pro pecti!e onl) !nova constitutio futurisformam imponere debet non praeteritis"* In t(e word of 1ORD #1ANES#UR00 8pro!i ion w(ic( touc( a rig(t in e/i tence at t(e pa ing of t(e tatute are not to 'e applied retro pecti!el) in t(e a' ence of e/pre enactment or nece ar) intendment.8C ,OP6S0 ,.@. o' er!ed t(at 86!er) tatute w(ic( take awa) or impair !e ted rig(t ac.uired under e/i ting law 0 or create a new o'ligation or impo e a new dut)0 or attac(e a new di a'ilit) in re pect of tran action alread) pa t0 mu t 'e pre umed to 'e intended not to (a!e a retro pecti!e effectA A a logical corollar) of t(e general rule0 t(at retro pecti!e operation i not taken to 'e intended unle t(at intention i manife ted ') e/pre word or nece ar) implication0 t(ere i a u'ordinate rule to t(e effect t(at a tatute or a ection in it i not to 'e con trued o a to (a!e larger retro pecti!e operation t(an it language render nece ar).B In ot(er word clo e attention mu t 'e paid to t(e language of t(e tatutor) pro!i ion for determining t(e cope of t(e retro pecti!it) intended ') Parliament.31$ &ut if (e liter reading of t(e pro!i ion gi!ing retro pecti!it) produce a' urditie and anomalie 0 a ca e not prima facie wit(in t(e word ma) 'e taken to 'e co!ered0 if t(e purpo e of t(e pro!i ion indicate t(at t(e intention wa to co!er it. It (a 'een aid t(at 8t(e 'a i of t(e rule i no more t(an imple fairne of e!er) legal rule.8 w(ic( oug(t to 'e t(e 'a i
%45age

It i not nece ar) t(at an e/pre pro!i ion 'e made to make retro pecti!e and t(e pre umption again t retro pecti!it) ma) 'e re'utted ') nece ar) implication e peciall) in a ca e w(ere t(e new law i made to cure an acknowledged e!il for t(e 'enefit of t(e communit) a a w(ole.11 T(e rule again t retro pecti!e con truction i not applica'le to a tatute merel) 8'ecau e a part of t(e re.ui ite for it action i drawn from a time antecedent to it pa ing8.12 If t(at were not o0 e!er) tatute will 'e pre umed to appl) onl) to per on 'orn and t(ing come into e/i tence after it operation and t(e rule ma) well re ult in !irtual nullification of mo t of t(e tatute . An amending Act i 0 t(erefore0 not retro pecti!e merel) 'ecau e it applie al o to t(o e to w(om pre;amended Act wa applica'le if t(e amended Act (a operation from t(e date of it amendment and not an anterior date.13 Anot(er principle flowing from pre umption again t retro pecti!it) i t(at 8one doe not e/pect rig(t conferred ') t(e tatute to 'e de tro)ed ') e!ent w(ic( took place 'efore it wa pa ed.814 In certain ca e 0 a di tinction i drawn 'etween an e/i ting rig(t and a !e ted rig(t and it i aid t(at t(e rule again t retro pecti!e con truction i applied onl) to a!e !e ted rig(t and not e/i ting rig(t . T(e di tinction0 (owe!er0 (a not 'een maintained in ot(er ca e . T(e word retro pecti!e9 (a t(u 'een u ed in different en e cau ing a certain amount of confu ion. 1" T(e real i ue in eac( ca e i a to t(e cope of particular enactment (a!ing regard to it language and t(e o'+ect di cerni'le from t(e tatute read a a w(ole.
III.

STATUTES DEA1IN0 2IT4 PROCEDURE3 In contra t to tatute dealing wit( u' tanti!e rig(t 0 tatute dealing wit( merel) matter of procedure are pre umed to 'e retro pecti!e unle uc( a con truction i te/tuall) inadmi i'le. 1% A tated ') ,OR: :6DDID#7 8T(e rule t(at an Act of parliament i not to 'e gi!en retro pecti!e effect applie onl) to tatute9 w(ic( affect !e ted rig(t . It doe not appl) to tatute w(ic( onl) alter t(e form of procedure or t(e admi i'ilit) of e!idence0 or t(e effect w(ic( t(e court gi!e to e!idence8. 1* If t(e new Act affect matter of procedure onl)0 t(en0 prima facie, 8it applie to all action pending a well a future8. In tating t(e principle t(at 8a c(ange in t(e law of procedure operate retro pecti!el) and unlike t(e law relating to !e ted rig(t i not onl) pro pecti!e8. T(e Supreme Court (a .uoted wit( appro!al t(e rea on of a e/pre ed in EAF?6,,7 8DO per on (a a !e ted rig(t in an) cour e of procedure. -e (a onl) t(e rig(t of pro ecution or defen e in t(e manner pre cri'ed for t(e time 'eing ') or for t(e court in w(ic( t(e ca e i pending and if ') an Act of Parliament t(e mode of procedure i altered (e (a no ot(er rig(t t(an to proceed according to t(e altered modeA.1C A c(ange of forum e/cept in pending proceeding "" i a matter of procedure and0 t(erefore0 if a new Act re.uire certain t)pe of original proceeding to 'e in tituted 'efore a pecial tri'unal con tituted under t(e Act to t(e e/clu ion of ci!il court 0 all proceeding of t(at t)pe w(et(er 'a ed on old or new cau e of action will (a!e to 'e in tituted 'efore t(e tri'unal.1B T(e non;e/ecuta'ilit) of a decree pa ed ') an Indian court again t a foreigner at a place in foreign countr) i al o a matter of procedure and t(e decree 'ecome e/ecuta'le if t(e place w(ere it i 'eing
745age

e/ecuted cea e to 'e a foreign countr) and 'ecome part of India and t(e Indian Code of Ci!il Procedure i e/tended to t(at place.2$ On t(e ame principle it wa (eld t(at an ar'itration award made in a foreign State i enforcea'le in t(e <nited Gingdom a a con!ention award under ection 3 of t(e Ar'itration Act0 1B*" if t(e foreign State i a part) to t(e Dew Hork con w(en proceeding for enforcing t(e award are taken alt(oug( it went on uc( a part) at t(e time of t(e making of t(e award.21 Section 4"& t(e 6mplo)ee 9 State In urance Act0 1B4C0 w(ic( ena'le t(e 6mplo)ee 9 State In urance Corporation to reco!er arrear of contri'ution from t(e emplo)er a arrear of land re!enue0 (a 'een (eld to 'e procedural and applica'le to arrear falling due 'efore coming into force of t(e S6CTIOD on @anuar) 2C0 IB%C.T(e rea on i t(at tatute pro!iding for new remedie for enforcement of an e/i ting rig(t are treated a procedural and appl) to future a well pa t cau e of action.22
II.

RECENT STATE%ENTS OF T4E RU1E A0AINST RETROSPECTIVIT5 7 T(e cla ifi; cation of a tatute a eit(er u' tanti!e or procedural doe not nece aril) determine w(et(er it ma) (a!e a retro pecti!e operation. Jor e/ample0 a tatute of limitation i generall) regarded a procedural 'ut if it application to a pa t cau e of action (a t(e effect of re!i!ing or e/tingui (ing a rig(t of . uit uc( an operation cannot 'e aid to 'e procedural.%2 It (a al o 'een een t(at t(e rule again t retro pecti!e con truction i not applica'le merel) 'ecau e a part of t(e re.ui ite for it action i drawn from a time antecedent to it pa ing0 %3 Jor t(e e rea on t(e rule again t retro pecti!it) (a al o 'een tated in recent )ear a!oiding t(e cla ification of tatute into u' tanti!e and procedural and a!oiding u e of word like e/i ting or !e ted.23 One uc( formulation ') :IFOD C.@. i a follow 7 8T(e general rule of t(e common law i t(at a tatute c(anging t(e law oug(t not0 unle t(e intention appear wit( rea ona'le certaint)0 to 'e under tood a appl)ing to fact or e!ent t(at (a!e alread) occurred in uc( a wa) a to confer or impo e or ot(erwi e affect rig(t or lia'ilitie w(ic( t(e law (ad define ') reference to t(e pa t e!ent . &ut gi!en rig(t and lia'ilitie fi/ed ') reference to t(e pa t fact 0 matter or e!ent 0 t(e law appointing or regulating t(e matter in w(ic( t(e) are to 'e enforced or t(eir en+o)ment i to 'e ecured ') +udicial remed) i not wit(in t(e application of uc( a pre umption 924 Anot(er more recent and more imple tatement of t(e rule wa made in retor" of State for So$ial Se$urit" v. 'unni$lijfe () 6* STAU04TON 1.7. t(e following word 7 8T(e true principle i t(at Parliament i pre umed 8K to (a!e intended to alter t(e law applica'le to pa t e!ent and tran ac; O@IS in a manner w(ic( i unfair to t(o e concerned in t(em unle a contrar) intention appear . It i not impl) a .ue tion of cla if)ing an enactment a retro pecti!e or not retro pecti!e. Rat(er it ma) well 'e a matter of degree;t(e greater t(e unfairne 0 t(e more it i to 'e e/pected t(at Parliament will make it clear if t(at i intended.8 T(e a'o!e tatement wa appro!ed ') t(e -ou e of ,ord in *offi$e Cherifien des +hos#hates v. ,amashita Shinnihon Steamshi# Co. -td #$ It wa o' er!ed t(at t(e .ue tion of fairne will (a!e to 'e an wered in re pect of a particular tatute ') taking into account !ariou factor 0 !i1.0 !alue of t(e rig(t w(ic( t(e tatute affect 3 e/tent to w(ic( t(at !alue i dimini (ed or e/tingui (ed ') t(e ugge ted retro pecti!e effect of t(e tatute3 unfairne of ad!er el) affecting t(e rig(t 3 clarit) of t(e language u ed ') Parliament and t(e circum tance in
845age

w(ic( t(e legi lation wa created.% 8All t(e e factor mu t 'e weig(ed toget(er to pro!ide a direct an wer to t(e .ue tion w(et(er t(e con e.uence of reading t(e tatute wit( t(e ugge ted degree of retro; pecti!it i o unfair t(at t(e word u ed ') Parliament cannot (a!e 'een intended to mean w(at t(e) mig(t appear to a).8 In %amashita!s ca e during t(e pendenc) of a claim in ar'itration t(e Ar'itration Act0 1BC$ wa amended ') in erting ection 13A w(ic( empowered t(e ar'itrator to di mi a claim if t(ere (a 'een inordinate and ine/cu a'le dela) on t(e part of t(e claimant in pur uing t(e claim w(ic( make fair re olution of t(e i ue difficult or cau e eriou pre+udice to pre+udice to re pondent. T(e .ue tion in t(e ca e wa w(et(er dela) ') t(e claimant in pur uing t(e claim 'efore t(e date of enactment of ection 13A could 'e taken into account in con idering t(e .ue tion of di mi al under t(at ection and t(i .ue tion were an wered in t(e affirmati!e. &ut it doe not follow t(at t(e rule a tated in t(e traditional form (a 'een a'andoned. Indeed t(e +udgment of t(e Court of Appeal in &unnicliff w(ere t(e rule of fairne wa tated and applied ') STA<#-TOD , @ o!erruled ') t(e -ou e of ,ord in 'lewa v. (hief Ad)udication *ffice 2*In t(at ca e t(e .ue tion related to t(e con truction of ection "3 of Social Securit) Act0 1BC%. T(i ection ena'led t(e Secretar) of State to recover o!er;pa)ment of pen ion from eit(er t(e recipient or from t(ird partie on w(o e mi repre entation or failure to di clo e o!er;pa)ment wa made. T(e pro!i ion creating an o'ligation on t(ird T(e doctrine of fairne wa referred to ') t(e Supreme Court in *ija" (. te oj.Maharashtra.+$ In t(i ca e a new law w(ic( enacted t(at 9no per;n (all 'e a mem'er of a Panc(a)at or continue a uc( w(o (a 'een SLect;d a a councilor of Mila Pari (ad a a mem'er of t(e Panc(a)at Samiti9 wa (eld to 'e retro pecti!e and applica'le to e/i ting mem'er of a Panc(a)at. In (olding o S.&. Sin(a0 @. o' er!ed7 8It i now well; ettled t(at w(en a literal reading of t(e pro!i ion gi!ing retro pecti!e effect doe not produce a' urdit) or anomal)0 t(e ame would not 'e con trued onl) pro pecti!e. T(e negation i not a rigid rule and !arie wit( t(e intention and purport of t(e legi lation0 'ut to appl) it in uc( a ca e i a doctrine of fairness. ?(en a new law i enacted for t(e 'enefit of t(e communit) a a w(ole0 e!en in a' ence of a pro!i ion t(e tatute ma) 'e (eld to 'e retro pecti!e in nature.82C I. 1AN0UA0E NOT A12A5S DECISIVE3 In deciding t(e .ue tion of applica'ilit) of a particular tatute to pa t e!ent 0 t(e language u ed i no dou't t(e mo t important factor to 'e taken into account3 2B 'ut it cannot 'e tated a an infle/i'le rule t(at u e of pre ent ten e or pre ent perfect ten e i deci i!e of t(e matter t(at t(e tatute doe not draw upon pa t e!ent for it operation. T(u 0 t(e word 9a de'tor commit an act of 'ankruptc)9 were (eld to appl) to act of 'ankruptc) committed 'efore t(e operation of t(e Act. T(e word 9if a per on (a 'een con!icted9 were con trued to include anterior con!iction . 3$ T(e word 9(a made90 9(a cea ed90 9(a failed9 and 9(a 'ecome90 ma) denote e!ent (appening 'efore or after coming into force of t(e tatute and all t(at i nece ar) i t(at t(e e!ent mu t (a!e taken place at t(e time w(en action on t(at account i take under t(e tatute. T(e word 9d)ing inte tate9 were interpreted ') t(e +udicial Committee not a connoting t(e future ten e 'ut a a mere de cription of t(e tatu of t(e decea ed per on wit(out an) reference to t(e time of (i deat( So t(e word 0 N(eld on lea e90 ma) 'e onl) de cripti!e of land and ma) appl) to land (eld on lea e prior to or after t(e coming into force of t(e Act.5
)45age

T(e word 0 9w(en a per on die 90 ma) include a per on w(o died prior to t(e coming into force of t(e Act. And t(e word 9i 9 t(roug( 9 normall) referring to t(e pre ent often (a a future meaning and ma) al o (a!e a pa t ignification in t(e en e of 9(a 'een9.31 T(e real i ue in eac( ca e i a to t(e dominant intention of t(e ,egi lature to 'e gat(ered from t(e language u ed0 t(e o'+ect indicated0 t(e nature of rig(t affected0 and t(e circum tance under w(ic( t(e tatute i pa ed.

8. RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION OF OT4ER STATUTES3

. STATUTES DEA1IN0 2IT4 SU#STANTIVE RI04TS -owe!er0 t(ere i a well accepted principle of interpretation t(at e!er) tatute i prima facie pro pecti!e in it operation o far a u' tanti!e rig(t are concerned0 t(e rea on 'eing t(at t(e legi lature could not (a!e intended affecting !e ted rig(t or to impo e new 'urden retro pecti!el) unle t(e word compel t(e court to gi!e effect to it retro pecti!el). /. /aja o#al /edd" vs. +admini9 C0D vs. 1. A. Mer$hant.32 -owe!er0 a tatute i not con idered retro pecti!e merel) 'ecau e part of t(e re.ui ite for it operation i drawn from a time antecedent to it pa ing. ,ao Shiv -ahadur Singh vs. State of ..'. AIR =1B"3> SC 3B4 at 3BC. Similarl)0 taking into account pa t e!ent doe not make t(e tatute retro pecti!e. E&!"t!ng r!g't" nd (e"ted r!g't"7 A di tinction (a 'een drawn ') !ariou deci ion 'etween an e/i ting rig(t and a !e ted rig(t and it i aid t(at rule again t retro pecti!e con truction i applied onl) to a!e !e ted rig(t and not e/i ting rig(t . Shri 2akul 3il 4ndustries vs. State of 5ujarat AIR -1:;7. SC 122. Sometime 0 in uc( a ituation t(e wordAretroacti!eA i u ed in tead of t(e word Nretro pecti!eA. 6. STATUTES DEA1IN0 2IT4 PROCEDURE7 A a tatute affecting or creating u' tanti!e rig(t i pre umed to 'e pro pecti!e0 a tatute dealing wit( matter of procedure i pre umed to 'e retro pecti!e unle t(e con truction of t(e tatute doe not admit of uc( a pre umption. ?(at i a matter of procedure and w(at i a matter of u' tance i again to 'e decided on t(e wording of eac( tatute and t(e con e.uence in!ol!ed. Statute dealing wit( matter of procedure will appl) to all action pending a well a future action 'ecau e no one (a a !e ted rig(t in an) cour e of procedure. C6' vs. Shravan 7umar S8aru# 33(olding Rule 1 && of ?.T Rule enacted w.e.f. 1;4; *B a retro pecti!e from A. H. 1B%";%% onward a t(e Rule wa procedural a regard !aluation. -owe!er0 t(ere are certain a pect dealing wit( procedure w(ic( ma) gi!e ri e to a !e ted rig(t and a tatute dealing wit( t(e e rig(t ma) not 'e con trued a retro pecti!e in it operation unle it i e/pre l) made retro pecti!e e.g.0 t(oug( tatute of limitation i a matter of procedure0 on e/pir) of t(e period of limitation0 a !e ted rig(t ari e and amendment of t(e period of limitation after t(e e/pir) of t(e aid period in a gi!en ca e will not re!i!e t(e period of limitation 'ut if t(e earlier
9( 4 5 a g e

period (a till not e/pired0 t(e new pro!i ion will e/tend t(at period. 9.+. 9ani 4'3 vs. 4ndu#rasad D. 2hatt.34 R!g't o) A<<e l 3 Similarl)0 t(oug( Appeal i a procedural part of t(e law0 it i con idered a a u' tanti!e and a !e ted rig(t in a litigant and uc( a !e ted rig(t cannot 'e pre umed to (a!e 'een taken awa) ') con truing t(e tatute a retro pecti!e unle uc( a con truction would 'ecome nece ar) 'ecau e of e/pre pro!i ion made in t(at 'e(alf. A c(ange of forum0 for enforcing rig(t e/cept in pending proceeding 0 i con idered a a matter of procedure and new forum (a to 'e re orted to e!en in re pect of old cau e of action. 1e8 4ndia Ass. Co. -td. vs. Shanti Misra AIR. 3"

c. FISCA1 STATUTES7 A regard fi cal legi lation0 it i generall) pre umed t(at t(e legi lation i not to 'e con trued a retro pecti!e unle it deal wit( procedure. It i common knowledge t(at Income;ta/ Act i to 'e applied a in force on t(e fir t da) of t(e a e ment )ear. /elian$e 9ute & 4nd. vs. C4'.3% An) u' e.uent legi lation enacted during t(e cour e of t(e a e ment )ear will not 'e applica'le for t(at a e ment )ear or part t(ereof /arimtharuvi &ea 0state vs. State of /erala 3*unle ') e/pre word or ') nece ar) implication it (a 'een made applica'le from t(e date t(e u' e.uent legi lation (a 'een enacted. (I& vs. -est 1 (o. 3C Similarl)0 e!en a procedural pro!i ion w(ic( effect finalit) of ta/ a e ment or reopen a lia'ilit) w(ic( i time 'arred0 cannot 'e o con trued a it i con idered a !e ted rig(t in t(at re pect. 2.'. 2ani vs. Induprasad 3evshankar -hatt 3B d. RE%EDIA1 STATUTES 7 -owe!er0 a lig(tl) different !iew (a 'een taken wit( regard to tatute conferring pro pecti!e 'enefit on antecedent fact . Suc( tatute are called remedial tatute . T(e !iew (a 'een taken t(at a pro pecti!e 'enefit under a tatutor) pro!i ion w(ic( i in certain ca e to 'e mea ured ') or depend on antecedent fact doe not nece aril) make t(e pro!i ion retro pecti!e. T(u 0 a tatute can 'e pro pecti!e e!en w(en part of t(e re.ui ite of it action of operation i drawn from t(e time antecedent to it pa ing. Similar i t(e po ition wit( regard to Ialidating Act w(ic( cure t(e defect in t(e pre!iou legi lation w(ic( re ulted in t(e Court (olding it in!alid.A Suc( legi lation i nece aril) made retro pecti!e0 curing t(e defect and a!ing con e.uence of illegalit). .)agar 'rints v4s. ..*.I.56. -owe!er0 wit(out curing t(e defect or lacuna in t(e law0 !alidating Act cannot merel) render +udicial !erdict in!alid a it would amount to e/erci e of +udicial power ') t(e legi lature State of 7aryana vs. /arnal (o8op. 9armers" Society . 41 New remed!e" )or e&!"t!ng r!g't"7 Similarl)0 tatute pro!iding new remedie for enforcement of e/i ting rig(t will appl) to future a well a pa t cau e of action0 t(e rea on 'eing t(at uc( tatute ince t(e) do not affect t(e e/i ting rig(t are cla ified a procedural. 3ena -ank vs. -hikabhai 'rabhudas 'arekh. 42 e. DEC1ARATOR5 STATUTES7 :eclarator) tatute are not go!erned ') t(e well known pre umption again t retro pecti!it). Suc( Act are u uall) (eld to 'e retro pecti!e 'ecau e t(e rea on for pa ing a declarator) Act i to et a ide w(at Parliament deem to (a!e 'een a +udicial error in interpretation. -owe!er0 mere u e of t(e word NIt i (ere') declaredA or t(e word Nfor t(e remo!al of dou't A do not make t(e tatute retro pecti!e and in pite of t(e e word t(e intended declaration or remo!al of dou't ma) onl) 'e operati!e from t(e date t(e aid tatute i enacted and
99 4 5 a g e

not for an) earlier period. T(ere are deci ion of t(e Supreme Court on 'ot( t(e ide of t(i !iew and ultimatel) it depend on t(e nature of p(ra eolog)0 t(e intention of t(e legi latureOt(e +udicial error oug(t to 'e remo!ed etc. Sometime 0 e!en tronger word (a!e 'een u ed uc( a N (all 'e deemed alwa) to (a!e 'een meantA or N (all 'e deemed ne!er to (a!e includedA. T(e e word are !er) trongl) indicati!e of retro pecti!it). Jollowing ca e (ow di!i ion of @udicial opinion at t(e le!el of Supreme Court al o7 P /. :. Sharma vs. I&* 5;. It wa (eld t(at lifting of 'ar of limitation ') :irect Ta/ ,aw amendment Act0 1BC* w.e.f 1;4;1BCB for rea e ment on 'a i of order pa ed ') Court in an) ot(er proceeding under an) ot(er law did not appl) to earlier A. H . ?(ic( were alread) 'arred on 1;4;1BCB . (I& vs. /erala 0lectric <amp =orks 5$. 6/planation " to . 32 wa added ') Jinance Act0 2$$1 tating t(at depreciation would 'e allowed e!en w(en not claimed. It wa (eld t(at it i not retro pecti!e 'ut effecti!e from A.H 1;4;2$$2. T(e amendment wa to uper ede +udgment of Supreme Court in Ea(indra Eill ca 4*.?ord u ed in t(e amendment were Nfor t(e remo!al of dou't 0 it i (ere') declaredA. On t(e ot(er (and0 in Allied :otors >'vt? <td. vs. (I& AIR4C pro!i o to . 43& added from 1;4;1BCC wa gi!en retro pecti!e effect from t(e date S. 43& wa introduced3 i.e0 1;4;1BC4 on t(e ground t(at pro!i o wa to remed) unintended con e.uence and uppl) o'!iou omi ion. Similarly in (I& vs. 'odar (ement 'vt. <td .4B it wa (eld t(at amendment in . 2* =iii>0 =iiia> and =iii'> defining Nowner of (ou e propert)A introduced ') Jinance Act0 1BC* wa declarator) and clarificator) in nature and wa con e.uentl) retro pecti!e. ). FINA1IT5 OR ORDERS 7 Similarl)0 an order w(ic( i final on t(e date on w(ic( it i made create a !e ted rig(t and a u' e.uent c(ange in t(e law gi!ing ri e to new rig(t of Appeal or Re!i ion i pre umed not to affect t(e finalit) of t(e order alread) made. 3afedar @iran)an Singh vs. (ustodian 0vacuee 'roperty and /eshavlal 2ethalal Shah vs. :ohanlal."$ -owe!er0 uc( a rig(t to finalit) can onl) ari e if t(e order i made. If pending t(e proceeding 0 furt(er rig(t of Appeal or Re!i ion i conferred3 uc( rig(t will 'e a!aila'le a t(e order (a not 'een made. Indira Sohanlal vs. (ustodian of 0vacuee 'roperty and :oti ,am vs. Sura) -han.

8. RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION OF PENA1 STATUTES3

Penal tatute w(ic( create offence or w(ic( (a t(e effect of increa ing penaltie for e/i ting offence can onl) 'e pro pecti!e ') rea on of con titutional pro(i'ition regarding retro pecti!it) impo ed ') Article 2$ of t(e Con titution. -owe!er0 in t(e ca e of State :throu h C24! Delhi; vs. 5ian Sin h. "2 it i (eld t(at if an) u' e.uent legi lation downgrade t(e (ar (ne of t(e entence for t(e ame offence0 t(e 'enefit of t(e new legi lation can 'e e/tended to an accu ed committing t(e offence prior to t(e new legi lation w(o i till to 'e finall) entenced. -owe!er0 Con titutional
93 4 5 a g e

pro(i'ition would not appl) to penaltie le!ied under ta/ law 0 a Nt(e proceeding in t(at 'e(alf t(oug( con idered .ua i;criminal0 do not con titute offence w(ic( onl) are (it ') Article 2$. Penal tatute w(ic( create offence or w(ic( (a!e t(e effect of impo ing penaltie for e/i ting offence will onl) 'e pro pecti!e ') rea on of t(e con titutional re triction impo ed ') Article 2$ of t(e Con tituent."3 6!en ot(erwi e t(e) are con trued pro pecti!e 8'ecau e it manife tl) (ock one9 en e of +u tice t(at an act0 legal at t(e time of doing it0 (ould 'e made unlawful ') ome new enactment8."4T(erefore0 if an Act create a new offence it will 'ring into it fold onl) t(o e offender w(o commit ail ingredient of t(e offence after t(e Act come into operation. Same principle (a 'een applied w(ile dealing wit( a law w(ic( affect t(e power of grant of pardon or remi ion. Section 433A of t(e Code of Criminal Procedure w(ic( re.uire t(at w(ere a entence of impri onment for life i impo ed on con!iction of a per on for an offence for w(ic( deat( i one of t(e puni (ment 0 uc( per on (all not 'e relea ed from pri on unle (e (ad er!ed at lea t fourteen )ear of impri onment (a 'een (eld to 'e applica'le to entence impo ed after t(e Coming in to force of t(e ection and not to per on con!icted 'efore it coming in to force."" Article 2$ corre pond to Article *=1> of t(e 6uropean Con!ention0 t(e econd lim' of w(ic( pro!ide 7 9Dor (all a (ea!ier penalt) 'e impo ed t(an t(e one t(at wa applica'le at t(e lime t(e criminal offence wa committed9. It wa (eld ') t(e -ou e of ,ord t(at penalt) 9applica'le9 referred to t(e ma/imum entence for t(e offence and Article *=1> wa not !iolated w(en t(ere wa a c(ange in t(e relea e regime 'etween t(e date of t(e offence0 w(ic( permitted unconditional relea e u'+ect to good 'e(a!ior after er!ing a part of t(e entence w(erea t(e relea e regime w(en (e wa con!icted permitted (i relea e after t(e ame period 'ut under a licen e w(ic( placed (im under uper!i ion and impo ed certain re triction on (i freedom on failure of w(ic( lie could 'e recalled to er!e t(e remaining entence7 ,. Aon the a##li$ation of Uitle" v. Se$retar" of State for Home De#artment!)<. T(e pro(i'ition of Article 2$ of t(e Con titution to enact retro pecti!e penal law (a no application to a law w(ic( onl) mollifie t(e rigour of an e/i ting penal law. Indeed0 Article 1"01 of t(e International co!enant on Ci!il and Political Rig(t 0 1B%% w(ic( wa ratified ') India on 1$;4;1B*B and w(ic( i included in t(e definition of -uman Rig(t in Section 2=d> of t(e Protection of -uman Rig(t Act0 1BB30 in addition to t(e afeguard contained in Article 2$ of t(e Con titution0 pro!ide 7 9If u' e.uent to t(e commi ion of t(e offence0 pro!i ion i made ') law for impo ition of a lig(ter penalt)0 t(e offender (all 'enefit t(ere')9. T(e .ue tion w(et(er a penal law w(ic( mollifie t(e rigour of an e/i ting penal law i retro pecti!e and to w(at e/tent will depend upon t(e con truction of t(e Act (a!ing regard to t(e well ettled rule of con truction. In /attan -ai v. State of +unjab,;B t(e Pro'ation of t(e Offender Act0 1B"C did not appl) to t(e area w(ere t(e offence wa committed at t(e time of commi ion of t(e offence or e!en w(en t(e accu ed wa con!icted 'ut it wa e/tended to t(at area w(ere (i appeal wa pending 'efore t(e Se ion @udge )et t(e Supreme Court (eld t(at t(e 'enefit of t(e Act could 'e gi!en to t(e accu ed. In State (. 5ian Sin h,;C t(e accu ed wa con!icted for t(e offence under Section 3=1> of t(e TA:A Act0 1BC" for commi ion of a terrori t act re ulting in deat( of a per on for w(ic( t(e onl) puni (ment wa deat( entence under ection 3=2> of t(e Act. T(e TA:A Act0 1BC" e/pired ') efflu/ of time on 22;";1BC* 'ut t(e proceeding were continued ') a a!ing clau e under t(e Act.
96 4 5 a g e

T(e Act of 1BC" wa replaced ') t(e TA:A Act of 1BC*. In t(i Act in t(e corre ponding Section 3=2> t(e (ar (ne of t(e entence wa diluted and t(e accu ed could 'e entenced to deat( or life impri onment. T(e .ue tion 'efore t(e Supreme Court0 w(ere t(e appeal of t(e accu ed and t(e reference for confirmation of deat( entence were pending0 wa w(et(er t(e 'enefit of t(e dilution of t(e (ar (ne of deat( entence in ection 3=2> of t(e 1BC* Act could 'e gi!en to t(e accu ed and (i entence of deat( could 'e replaced ') entence for life impri onment. T(e Supreme Court in t(e e circum tance ga!e t(e 'enefit of Section 3=2> of t(e 1BC* Act to t(e accu ed and entenced (im to life impri onment. T(e Supreme Court ga!e two rea on for appl)ing ection 3=2> of t(e 1BC* Act. T(e court fir t applied a general principle in t(e ca e w(ic( wa tated a follow 7 8If an) u' e.uent legi lation would downgrade t(e offence0 it would 'e a alutor) principle for admini tration of criminal +u tice to ugge t t(at t(e aid legi lati!e 'ene!olence can 'e e/tended to t(e accu ed w(o await +udicial !erdict regarding entence.8 T(e econd rea on t(at t(e Supreme Court ga!e wa t(at t(e continued operation of t(e 1BC" Act after e/pir) under a a!ing clau e for continuance of criminal proceeding in re pect of offence committed w(en t(e Act wa in force 'ecame incon i tent0 in o far t(e entence part of ame ection 3=2> wa concerned0 wit( ection 3=2> of t(e 1BC* Act and could not 'e gi!en 1BC*. 6ffect to in !iew ection 2" of t(e 1BC* Act w(ic( ga!e an o!erriding effect to t(e Act o!er an) enactment in ca e of incon i tenc). &ut t(e 'enefit of mollification of ingredient of t(e u' tanti!e offence after con!iction during pendenc) of appeal (a not 'een allowed to t(e accu ed. T(u 0 a notification making a di tinction 'etween a mall .uantit) and commercial .uantit) of 'rown ugar and t(ere') making po e ion of a mall .uantit) of 'rown ugar not an offence under Section 2 of t(e Darcotic :rug and P )c(otropic Su' tance Act0 1BC" (a not 'een applied in a ca e w(ere t(e notification wa i ued after commi ion of t(e offence and al o after t(e accu ed wa entenced. Similarl)0 'enefit of mollification of pre cri'ed tandard of mineral oil in relation to (ard;'oiled ugar confectioner) ') a notification w(ic( came into force during pendenc) of appeal again t con!iction wa not allowed to t(e accu ed.%1 It i open to t(e ,egi lature to make a pro!i ion in t(e law amending 2nd mollif)ing e/i ting penal law t(at t(e amending Act will appl) in ca e pending trial 'ut will not appl) to ca e pending in appeal. &) Section 4=1> of t(e Darcotic :rug and P )c(otropic Su' tance =Amendment> Act0 2$$1 w(ic( rationali1ed t(e entencing tructured pro!iding graded entence linked to t(e .uantit) of Darcotic :rug0 made t(e amended pro!i ion applica'le to ca e pending 'efore t(e court under in!e tigation 'ut e/cluded t(e application of t(e Act to ca e pending in appeal. T(i pro!i ion wa (eld to 'e !alid.%2 T(e procedure pre cri'ed for trial of offence in a new Act ma) 'e applied for trial of imilar offence under a repealed Act. T(u anction for pro ecution granted under t(e pro!i ion of t(e new Act will 'e good for pro ecution of an offence re.uiring anction under t(e repealed Act0 for anction pertain to procedure. &ut t(e .ue tion w(et(er a law w(ic( doe not affect t(e puni (ment 'ut applie a procedure0 w(ic( i pre+udicial to t(e accu ed ') curtailing (i procedural rig(t0 can 'e retro pec; ti!el) applied to offence taking place earlier and i not !iolati!e of Article 2$ of t(e Con titution (a 'een referred to a Con titution &enc(.%3

9- 4 5 a g e

T(e enforcement of t(e -uman Rig(t Act0 1BBC in 6ngland from 2nd Octo'er 2$$$0 ection * of w(ic( ena'le t(e !ictim of an unlawful act ') a pu'lic aut(orit) to rel) on t(e Act in 9proceeding 'roug(t ') or at t(e in!e tigation of a pu'lic aut(orit) w(ene!er t(e act in .ue tion took place9 wa (eld not to appl) w(en t(e per on complaining (ad 'een con!icted 'efore t(e enforcement of t(e Act0 t(oug( (i appeal wa pending w(en t(e Act came into force. &ut t(i deci ion wa not unanimou and wa later followed wit( con idera'le (e itation.%3 In +"are -ai Sharma v. Mana in Dire$tor! 9ammu & 7ashmir 4ndustries -td $5 Regulation 1%.14 of t(e @ammu 2 Ga (mir Indu trie 6mplo)ee Ser!ice Rule w(ic( wa amended on April 2$0 1BC3 came for con ideration. T(e amendment added certain more ground for termination of er!ice of an emplo)ee and one of t(e ground o added wa 7 If (e Ot(e emplo)ee> remain on unaut(ori1ed a' ence9. In con truing t(e Regulation t(e Supreme Court (eld t(at t(e period of unaut(ori1ed a' ence prior to t(e date of amendment could not 'e taken into con ideration for terminating t(e er!ice of an emplo)ee. In o con truing t(e Regulation t(e court o' er!ed7 8It i t(e 'a ic principle of natural +u tice t(at no one can 'e penali1ed;on t(e ground of a conduct w(ic( wa not penal on t(e da) it wa 9committed.8C* T(i ca e (ow t(at t(e rule of con truction again t retroacti!it) of penal law i not re tricted to Act pro!iding for criminal offence 'ut applie al o to law w(ic( pro!ide for ot(er penal con e.uence of a e!ere nature0 e.g., termination of er!ice.

=. CONC1USION3
All tatute ot(er t(an t(o e w(ic( are merel) declarator) or w(ic( relate onl) to matter of procedure or of e!idence are prima facie pro pecti!eA and retro pecti!e operation (ould not 'e gi!en to a tatute o a to affect0 alter or de tro) an e/i ting rig(t or create a new lia'ilit) or o'ligation unle t(e effect cannot 'e a!oided wit(out doing !iolence to t(e language of t(e enactment. If t(e enactment i e/pre ed in language w(ic( i fairl) capa'le of eit(er interpretation0 it oug(t to 'e con trued a pro pecti!e onl). ?(ere t(e language of tatute i u cepti'le of 'ot(
9, 4 5 a g e

interpretation t(en pro pecti!e interpretation mu t 'e preferred w(ic( pro!ide for moderate 2 (armoniou po ition T(e rig(t to protection from retro pecti!e criminal law i well recogni ed t(roug(out t(e international communit). Het t(ere are man) e/ample 0 in communitie w(ic( claim to e pou e t(i rig(t a 'eing fundamental0 w(ere retroacti!e criminal law (a!e 'een made. Jortunatel) t(e Indian con titution protect u from e/ po t facto law . Article 2$=1> i trul) a 'le ing to all of u . An act done innocentl) ') an indi!idual in t(e pa t0 w(ic( i illegal in t(e pre ent0 t(e tate cannot pro ecute t(e indi!idual a it i again t t(e principle of natural +u tice 'ecau e t(e indi!idual w(en committing t(e act couldn5t (a!e rea ona'l) or ') an) ot(er met(od come to know t(at t(e act would 'ecome illegal in t(e future. T(u criminal law wit( retro pecti!e effect are totall) a' urd0 unfair and un+u t. -a!ing criminal law wit( retro pecti!e effect i again t t(e rig(t to life.

>. #I#1IO0RAP453
1. S!ng' 0.P.0 Principle of Statutor) Interpretation0 6le!ent( 6dition 2$$C0 ,e/i De/i &utterwort(5 Pu'lication 2. #' tt c' r** T.0 T(e Interpretation of Statute 0 Jourt( 6dition 2$$10 Alla(a'ad ,aw Agenc) Pu'lication 3. S rt'! V. P.? Interpretation of tatute 0 Jourt( 6dition 2$$"0 6a tern &ook Compan) Pu'lication 4. % t',r D.N.0 Introduction To Interpretation of Statute 0 Second 6dition 2$$"?ad(wa pu'lication 9% 4 5 a g e

". T(e C(artered Accountant Eaga1ine on retro pecti!e operation of tatue :ecem'er 2$$"

C "e" )or Re)erence"3

1. AIR =1B%4> SC 1*2B at 1*3"3 =2$$%> % SCC 2CB;& 2. N t!on l Agr!c,lt,r l Coo<er t!(e % rket!ng Feder t!on o) Ind! 1td. (. Un!on o) Ind! ? -2@@/. = SCC 2/? <. /@3 AIR 2@@/ SC 1/2: -Im<l!ed A,d!c! ll* recogn!"ed l!m!t t!on" )or m k!ng retro"<ect!(e leg!"l t!on.. 3. D!"tr!ct %!n!ng O))!cer (. T t Iron B Steel Co.? AIR 2@@1 SC /1/8? <<. /18@? /1== 3 CD.. -2@@1. 7. SCC /=;. 4. State of Tamil Dadu !. Arooran Sugar ,td.0 ER 1BB* SC 1C1"7 3BB* =1> SCC 32%. "..P. Gannada an !. State of Tamil Dadu0 AIR 1BB% SC 2"%Q 7 1BB% ="> SCC %*$. . Ge (!an !. State of &om'a)0 AIR 1B"1 SC 12C0 p. 13$ 7 1B"1 SCR 22C3 %. C. #upta !. #la/o Smit(kline P(armaceutical ,td.0 =2$$*> * SCC 1*1 =&roadening of t(e definition of 9?orkman9 ') amendment in t(e Indu trial :i pute Act0 1B4* i not retro pecti!e affect t(e di mi al of an emplo)ee w(o wa not a workman on t(e date of (i di mi al> *.9A new law oug(t to regulate w(at i to follow0 not t(e pa t9. OS&ORD7 Conci e ,a 0!ii :ictionar)0p. 224. C. G.C. arora !. State of -ar)ana 1B*% 2SCC B1* B. S()am Sunder !. Ram Gumar. AIR 2$$1 SC 24*20 pp. 24C10 24C2 7 =2$$1> C SCC 243 Co;operati!e Compan) ,td. !. Commi ioner of Trade Ta/ <.P.0 =2$$*> 4 SCC 4C$ =para 2B> 3 =2$$*> % @T 4B 3 =2$$*> " S,T 4$$ 1$.T(e doctrine of fairne in t(e conte/t of retro pecti!it) wa al o referred to ') Sin(a @. in Ii+a! !. State of Ea(ara (tra0 =2$$%> % SCC 2CB 7 =2$$%> * @T 112 11. Eit(ile ( Gumari !. Prem &i(ari G(are0 AIR 1BCB SC 124*0 p. 12"4 7 1BCB =2> SCC B"3 Mile Sing( !. State of -ar)ana0 =2$$4> C SCC 10 p. B 7 AIR 2$$4 SC 32 3%. 12. 12. :ilip !. Eo(d. A1i1ul -a.0 AIR 2$$$ SC 1B*%0 p;=2$$$> 3 SCC %$*. 13. AIR 2$$$ SC 3%"40 p. 3%%$7 =2$$$> " SCC %B4 =T(e pa age in t(e te/t from t(i 'ook i .uoted from *t( edition p. 3%B>. 14. &irming(am Cit) Council !. ?alker0 =2$$*> 3 All 6R 44"0 p. 44B =para 11> =-,>. 1" .#ardner 2 Co. !. Cone0 =1B2C> All 6R Rep 4"C0 p. 4%1 1*. #ur'ac(an Sing( !. Satpal Sing(0 AIR 1BB$ SC 2$B0 p. 21B7 =1BB$> 1 SCC 443 1C. S()am Sunder !. Ram Gumar0 AIR 2$$1 SC 24*20 p. 24C2 7 =2$$1> C SCC 24 1B. Dew India In urance Co. ,td. !. S(anti Ei ra =Smt.>0 AIR 1B*% SC 23* 7 =1B*"> 2 SCC C4$ 2$. &. Dar(ari S(i!ram S(et Dar!ekar !. Pannalal <mediram0 AIR 1B** SC 1%4 7 =1B*%> 3 SCC 2$3. 21. Guwait Eini ter of Pu'lic !. Sir Jrederick Snow 2 Partner 0 =1BC4> 1 El 6R *3 p. *3* =-,>. 22. 6mplo)ee 9 State In urance Corporation !. :warka Dat( &(argawa0 AIR 98 3"1C0 p. 3"1B 7 1BB* =*> SCC 131. 22. :ilip !0 Eo(d. A1i1ul -a..0 AIR 2$$$ SC 1B*%0 pp. 1B*B0 1BC$ 7 =2$$$> 3 SCC 23. Sing( #.P. Priciple of interpretation 11t( edition 2$$Cpage no. 4BB 24. Ea/well !. Eurp()0 =1B"*> B% C,R 2%10 p. 2%*2". =1BB1> 2 All 6R *12 7 =1BB2> 4 2%. =1BB4> " SCC "B3. D! -BB4> 1 All 6R 2$0 p. 3$ 7 =1BB4> 1 AC 4C% =-,>. 2*. =1BB4>3 All 6R 3237 =1BB"> 1 AC 24B 7 =1BB4> 3 ?,R 31* =-,>. 2C -2@@>. > SCC 2;: 3 -2@@>. 7 7T 112 2B. P. #ane (war Rao !. State ofAnd(ra Prade (0 AIR 1BCC SC 2$%C0 p. 2$B2 7 1BCC Supp SCC *4$ 3$. Slate of &om'a) !. Ii (nu Ram C(andra0 AIR 1B%1 SC 3$*0 p. 31$ 31.Anand Ca+pati Ra+u !. P. I.#. Ra+u0 @T 2$$$ =4> SC "B$. p. "B3 7 =2$$$> 4 SCC "?;AIR 2$$$ SC 1CC% =Con truing t(e word 9+udicial aut(orit) 'efore w(ic( an action i 'roug(t in a matter w(ic( i t(e u'+ect of 97 4 5 a g e

an ar'itration agreement9 in ection C= of t(e Ar'itration Act 1BB%0 it wa (eld t(at an ar'itration agreement need not 'e e/i tence w(en t(e action i 'roug(t and t(e) will al o co!er a ca e w(ere =T(e ar'itration agreement come into e/i tence after t(e action i 'roug(t>. 32. =1BB"> 213 ITR 34$ =SC> 3 =1BCB> 1** ITR 4B$ =SC> 33. =1BB4> 21$ ITR CC% =SC> 34. =1B%B> *2 ITR "B" =SC> 3". =1B*%> SC 23* 3%. =1B*B> 12$ ITR B21 =SC> 3*. =1B%%> %$ ITR 2%2 =SC> 3C. =1B*B> 11B ITR C3$ =Ead>. 3B. =1B%B> *2 ITR "B"=SC>. 4$.=1BCB> 1*B ITR 31* =SC> 41. AIR =1BB4> SC 1 42. AIR =2$$$> SC 3%"4 at 3%%$ 44. &(attac(ar))a T.0 T(e Interpretation of Statute 0 Jourt( 6dition 2$$1page no 4". -2@@/. /=8 ITR 77/ -SC. 4%. =2$$3> 2%1 ITR *21 =Gerala> 4*. -2@@@. 28/ ITR => 4C. =1BB*> SC 13%1 4B. AIR =1BB*> SC 2"23 at 2"3C0 22% ITR %2" =SC> "$.AIR=1B%1>SC142"3"$AIR=1B%C>SC133% "1. AIR =1B"%> SC**atC43AIR=1B%$>SC%""at%"* "2. AIR =1BBB> SC 34"$ "3. Som :e!ra+'(ai &a'u'(ai !. State of #u+arat0 AIR 1BB1 SC 21*3 7 =1BB1> 4 SCC 2BC =Section 3$4& of t(e Penal Code pro!ide a new offence of :owr) deat( and i not retro pecti!e>3 Galpnat( Rat !. State. AIR 1BBC SC 2$10 p. 21$ 7 =1BB*> C SCC *33 =All t(e ingredient of t(e offence mu t (appen after t(e new offence come into force. Ca e relating to ection 3="> of TA:A>. "4. =An) pro!i ion w(ic( increa e t(e penalt) particularl) if coupled wit( an additional lia'ilit) to impri onment cannot 'e con trued retro pecti!e>. T(e rule again t retro pecti!it) of penal tatute ma) al o appl) to 8an) taw t(at alter t(e legal rule of e!idence0 t(u accepting le or different te ti mon) t(an t(e law re.uired at t(e time of t(e commi ion of t(e offence0 in order to con!ict t(e offender8 "". State of -ar)ana !. Ram :i)a0 AIR 1BB$ SC 133%0 pp. 133C0 133B 7 1BB$ =2> SCO *$1 "%. -2@@8. 8 All ER 1 -41. "*. AIR 1B%" SC 4440 p. 44% "C. AIR 1::: SC /8=@3 -1:::. : SCC /12. "B. I'id. %$. P.P. Jat(ima !0 State of Gerala0 =2$$3> C SCC *2% 7 =2$$3> C @T "2* %1. :a)al Sing( !. State of Ra+a t(an0 =2$$4> " SCC *21 7 AIR 2$$4 SC 2%$C. %2. Pralap Sing( !. Stare of @(ark(and0 =2$$"> 3 SCC ""10 =para 32>0 p. "C*;CB R@u!enile @u tice =care and Protection of C(ildren> Act0 2$$$ w(ic( repealed @u!enile @u tice Act0 1BC%0 in ection 2$ gi!e 'enefit of t(e newin pending ca e to t(o e w(o were @u!enile under t(e new Act w(en t(e new came into force t(oug( t(e) ma) (a!e cea ed to 'e +u!enile under t(e old Act;wa (eld to 'e con i tent wit( Article 2$ of t(e con titution%3. %3. R (. 1 m6ert? -2@@1. / All ER.=77 -41..9R (. + n" ! -No. 2.? -2@@2. 1 All ER 2=7 -41. %4. AIR 1BCBSC 1C"47 =1BCB>3 SCC 44C.

98 4 5 a g e