An Evaluation On Enabling Statute: Rules of Interpretation
The term interpretation means “To give meaning to”. Governmental power has been divided into three wings namely the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Interpretation of statues to render justice is the primary function of the judiciary. It is the duty of the Court to interpret the Act and give meaning to each word of the Statute. The most common rule of interpretation is that every part of thestatute must be understood in a harmonious manner by reading and construing every part of it together. The maxim “A Verbis legis non est recedendum” means that you must not vary the words of the statute while interpreting it. The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used.
The object of interpretaton of statute is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used in Santi swarup Sarkar v pradeep kumar sarkar, the Supreme Court held that if two interpretations are possible of the same statute,the one which validates the statute must be preferred.Interpretation is the primary function function of the court. The court interprets the legislature whenever a dispute arises before the court. Since the will of the legislature is generally expressed in the form of statutes, the prime concern of the court is to find out the intentions of the legislature in the language used by the legislature in the statute.
The court is not expected to to interpret arbitarily and consequently there have to be certain principles which have evolved out of the continous exercise by the courts. These principles are sometimes called rules of interpretation. The words interpretation and construction are generally used synonymously even though jurisprudentially they are perhaps different. Interpreation means the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words in their natural and ordinary meaning whereas construction means drawing conclusion on the basis of the true spirit of the enactment even though the same does not appear if the words used in the enactments are given their natural meaning. To ensure that justice is made available to all, the judicial system has beenevolved in all nations. It is extremely important and infact necessary also that the Courts interpret the law in such a manner that ensures ‘access to justice’ to the maximum. For this purpose, the concept of ‘Canons of Interpretation’ has been expounded. The Canons are those rules that have been evolved by the Judiciaryto help Courts determine the meaning and the intent of legislation.
SALMOND has defined it as “the process by which the Courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the Legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed.”A Statute is an edict of the Legislature and it must be construed “to the intent of them who make it” and “duty of the judicature is to act upon the true intention of the Legislature- the mens or sententia legis”
Need For Interpretation:
In his The Law-Making Process, Michael Zander gives three reasons why statutory interpretation is necessary:
1. Complexity of statutes in regards to the nature of the subject, numerous draftsmen and the blend of legal and technical language can result in incoherence, vague and ambiguous language.
2. Anticipation of future events leads to the use of indeterminate terms. The impossible task of anticipating every possible scenario also leads to the use of indeterminate language. Judges therefore have to interpret statutes because of the gaps in law. Examples of inderterminate language include words such as “reasonable”. In this case the courts are responsible for determining what constitutes the word “reasonable”.
3. The multifaceted nature of language. Language, words and phrases are an imprecise form of communication. Words can have multiple definitions and meanings. Each party in court will utilize the definition and meaning of the language most advantageous to their particular need. It is up to the courts to decide the most correct use of the language employed.
Classification Of Statutes:
A statute is a written law passed by a legislature on the state or federal level. Statutes set forth general propositions of law that courts apply to specific situations. A statute may forbid a certain act, direct a certain act, make a declaration, or set forth governmental mechanisms to aid society. A statute begins as a bill proposed or sponsored by a legislator. If the bill survives the legislative committee process and is approved by both houses of the legislature, the bill becomes law when it is signed by the executive officer (the president on the federal level or the governor on the state level). When a bill becomes law, the various provisions in the bill are called statutes. The term “statute”signifies the elevation of a bill from legislative proposal to law. State and federal statutes are compiled in statutory codes that group the statutes by subject.
These codes are published in book form and are available at law libraries. Lawmaking powers are vested chiefly in elected officials in the legislative branch. The vesting of the chief lawmaking power in elected lawmakers is the foundation of a representative democracy. Aside from the federal and state constitutions, statutes passed by elected lawmakers are the first laws to consult in finding the law that applies to a case. A statute may be generally classified with refernce to its duration, method, object and extent of application.
A. Classification with reference to duration.
Such a mode classifies a statute as:
1) Temporary Statute.
2) Permanent Statute.
A temporary statute is one where its period of operation or its validity has been fixed by the statute itself. Such an Act continues in force, unlesss repealed earlier, until the time so fixed. A permanent statute on the other hand, is one where no such period has been mentioned but this does not make the statute unchangeable; such a satute may be ammended or replaced by another act.
B. Classification with references to method.
Such a mode classifies a statute as:
1) Mandatory, imperative or obligatory statute.
2) Directory or Permissive Statute.
A mandatory statute is one which compels performance of certain things or compels that a certain thing must be done in a certain manner or form. A directory statute on the other hand, merely directs or permits a thing to be done without compelling its performance.
C. Classification with reference to object.
A statute may be classified with reference to its object as:
1) Codifying Statute
2) Consolidating Statute.
3) Declaratory Statute
4) Remedial Statute.
5) Enabling Statute.
6) Disabling Statute.
7) Penal Statute.
8) Taxing Statute.
9) Explanatory Statute.
10) Amending Statute.
11) Repealing Statute.
12) Curative or Validating Statute.
Among the above mentioned Statutes, Enabling Statute can be discussed below.
An enabling statute is one which enlarges the common law where it is narrow. It makes doing of something lawful which would not be otherwise lawful. By an enabling act, the legislature enables something to be done. It empowers at the same time, by necessary implications, to do the indespensable things for carrying out the object of the legislation. Acts authorising compulsort acquisition of land for public benefit of, for legalising public or private nuisanceare instances of enabling statutes. The conditions which have been put by an enabling act for the public goodmust be complied with as they are indespensible. Such a statute grants power to make rules etc. to carry out the purposes of the Act and these rules may provide for a number of enumerated matters in particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions. Sections 49-A and 49-A(2) of the Advocates Act as amended by Act 21 of 1964 is an illustration of this kind.
Meaning & Purpose
A statute which makes it lawful to do something which would not otherwise be lawful is called enacting law. A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state or city or country typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. The word is often used to distinguish law made by legilative bodies from case laws, decided by courts, and regulations issued by government authorities. Statutes are sometimes referred to as legislations or "black letter law." As a source of law, statutes are considered primary authority (as opposed to secondary law). Ideally all statutes must be in harmony with the fundamental law of the land (constitutional).
This word is used in contradistinction to the commmon law. Statutes acquire their force from the time of their passage, however unless otherwise provided. Statutes are of several kinds; namely, Public or private. Declaratory or remedial. Temporary or perpetual. A temporary statute is one which is limited in its duration at the time of its enactment. It continues in force until the time of its limitation has expired, unless sooner repealed. A perpetual statute is one for the continuance of which there is no limited time, although it may not be expressly declared to be so. If, however, a statute which did not itself contain any limitation is to be governed by another which is temporary only, the former will also be temporary and dependent upon the existence of the latter.
Before a statute becomes law in some countries, it must be agreed upon by the highest executive in the government, and finally published as part of a code. In many countries, statutes are organized in topical arrangements (or "codified") within publications called codes ,as the United Sate Codes. In many nations statutory law is distinguished from and subordinate to constitutional law. One of the principles of law with regards to the effects of an enabling act is that if the legislature enables something to be done, it gives power at the same time, by necessary implications, to do everything which is indespensable for the purposes of carrying out the purposes in view. This general rule under the law is that whenever the legislature gives any power to a public body to do anything of a “public character”, the legislature means also gives to the public body all rights without which the power would be wholly unavailable, although such a meaning cannot be implied in relation to the circumstances arising accidentally only.
Thus, if any public body is authorised to make byelaws, it implies that it has also the power to enforce it. When a capacity or power is given toa publi body, there may be circumstances which is coupled with power a duty to exercise it or to exercise it in a manner in which it may only be exercised . In other words, it would mean that if the legislature enables something to be done, it gives power at the same time by necessary implication to do anything which is indespensible for the purpose of carrying out the object in view: ubi aliquid concedetur, conceditur etiam id sine quo res ipsa non esse potest (i.e. where anything is conceded, there is conceded also anything without which the thing itself cannot exist). The grant of a right to do anything naturally implies the grant of the means of necessary for its exercise. This is wat is called as doctrine of implied powers. Quando lex aliquid concedit Concedere videtur et illud sine que res ipsa non esse potest,i.e, “whoever grants a thing is deemed to have that without whichthe grant itself would be of no effect” .
In India, similarly in Bidi Leaves and Tobacco Merchant Association v. St. of Bombay and others,  the Supreme Court held that the statutory provisions would be a dead letter and cannot be enforced unless a subsidiary power is implied. Therfore, if it is found that a duty has been imposed or a power conferred on an authority by a statute, and it is further found that a duty cannot be discharged , unless some auxiliary power is assumed to have exist, it would be quite legitimate to invoke the doctrine of implied powers.
Construction Of Enabling Statutes:
The enabling words in a statute are to be construed as compulsory, whenever the object of the power is to effectuate a legal right. Thus, the Act which authorise the compulsory accquisation of land for public purposes and deal with public nuisance have a compulsory effect. Similarly, many other things can be done by an ActofParliament effect of an enabling act which gives power to a public body to do an act of public character, it carries with it the power to accomplish it, otherwise the power so given would be meaningless. Another rule is that where legislature lays down in express terms the mode of dealing with the particular matter, it excludes any other mode except as specifically authorised. This rule is expressed in the maxim, Expressio unius est exclusio alterius,i.e. ( express enactment shuts the door to further implications) .
Whenver the case is clearly within the mischief, the words must be read so as to cover the case, if by any reasonable construction they could be read so as to cover it, though the words may point more exactly to another case. This is to be done rather than make such a case a casus omissus under the statute . When the legislature clearly and distinctly authorises the doing of a thing which is physically inconsistent with the continuance of an existing right, the right is gone, because the thing cannot be done without abrogating the right. .
Rules As To Discretionary Powers Given By Enabling Acts:
It is not necessary that intention of the Legislature should always be expressed in mandatory and directory enactments. Sometimes a statute is passed for the purposes of enabling something to be done – which means that the statute gives a discretionary power to the authorities, to carry out the purpose of the statutre in a manner which they deem fit, after considerationb of the local conditions and other circumstances, as the case may be. Discretionary power thus conferred by the statutes leaves the donee of the power free to use or not to use it, at its discretion. But when an enabling act gives a discretionary power to persons to carry out the purposes of the statutes , discretion is absolute, that is to say. It is the duty of those persons to carry out that purposes . When such discretion has to be exercised by a Court of justice, it must be governed by rules and not by homour; it must not be arbitary, vague and fanciful but legal and regular.
However, permissive words are employed by the legislature to confer a power on Court to be exercised in the circumstances pointed out by the stattute, it becomes the duty of the court to exercise that power on proof of those circumstances. The use of the permissive words in such cases is the usual courtsey of legislature in dealing with the judicature. Thus the word”may” is also capable of being contrued as to reffering compellable duty, particularly when it refers to powers conferred on Court. .
Delegated Legislation In Conformity With Enabling Acts:
Legislation by the executive branch or a statutory authority or local or other body under the authority of the competent legislature is called “Delegated legislation”. It permits the bodies beneath parliament to pass their own legislation. It is legislation made by a person or body other than Parliament. Parliament, through an Act of Parliament, can permit another person or body to make legislation. An Act of Parliament creates the framework of a particular law and tends only to contain an outline of the purpose of the Act. By Parliament giving authority for legislation to be delegated it enables other persons or bodies to provide more detail to an Act of Parliament. Parliament thereby, through primary legislation (i.e. an Act of Parliament), permit others to make law and rules through delegated legislation. The legislation created by delegated legislation must be made in accordance with the purposes laid down in the Act. The function of delegated legislation is it allows the Government to amend a law without having to wait for a new Act of Parliament to be passed. Further, delegated legislation can be used to make technical changes to the law, such as altering sanctions under a given statute. Also, by way of an example, a Local Authority have power given to them under certain statutes to allow them to make delegated legislation and to make law which suits their area. Delegated legislation provides a very important role in the making of law as there is more delegated legislation enacted each year than there are Acts of Parliament. In addition, delegated legislation has the same legal standing as the Act of Parliament from which it was created.
There are several reasons why “delegated legislation” is important.
Firstly, it avoids overloading the limited Parliamentary timetable as delegated legislation can be amended and/or made without having to pass an Act through Parliament, which can be time consuming. Changes can therefore be made to the law without the need to have a new Act of Parliament and it further avoids Parliament having to spend a lot of their time on technical matters, such as the clarification of a specific part of the legislation.
Secondly, delegated legislation allows law to be made by those who have the relevant expert knowledge. By way of illustration, a local authority can make law in accordance with what their locality needs as opposed to having one law across the board which may not suit their particular area. A particular Local Authority can make a law to suit local needs and that Local Authority will have the knowledge of what is best for the locality rather than Parliament.
Thirdly, delegated legislation can deal with an “emergency situation”as it arises without having to wait for an Act to be passed through Parliament to resolve the particular situation.
Finally, delegated legislation can be used to cover a situation that Parliament had not anticipated at the time it enacted the piece of legislation, which makes it flexible and very useful to law-making. Delegated legislation is therefore able to meet the changing needs of society and also situations which Parliament had not anticipated when they enacted the Act of Parliament.
Grounds On Which Delegated Legislation Can Be Challenged:
A. Enabling or Parent Act is unconstitutional : In India, there is supremacy of the Constitution and therefore an act passed by the Legislature is required to be in conformity with the constitutional requirement and if it is found to be in violation of the constitutional provisions, the court declares it unconstitutional and void. If enabling or parent act (i.e the act providing for the delegation) is void and subordinate or delegated legislation made under the act will also be declared to be unconstitutional and therefore void. The limits of the Constitution may be express and implied.
Express Limit: Articles 13, 245 and 246 provide the express limits of the constitution. Article 13(1) provides that all laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of the constitution in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Part III (fundamental rights) shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void. According to article 13(2), the state shall not make any law which takes away orabridges the rights conferred by part III (i.e the Fundamental Rights) and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void. Article 13(3) makes it clear that for this purpose, unless the context otherwise requires , law includes any ordinance, order, by – law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India, the force of law. The legislature, thus, cannot violate the provisions of part III of the constitution granting the fundamental rights. If the parent or enabling Act is violative of the Fundamental Rights granted by part III of the constitution, it will be declared by the court as unconstitutional and void, and the subordinate or delegated legislation made under the act will also be held to be unconstitutional and void.
Article 245 makes it clear that the legislative powers of the parliament and that of the state legislatures are subject to the provisions of the constitution. Parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India and the legislatures of a state make laws for the whole or any part of the state. No law made by the parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it would have extra territorial operation. The state legislature can make law only for the State concerned and, therefore, the law made by the state legislature having operation outside the state would be invalid  . In the matter of Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal,  the Karnataka Cauvery Basin Irrigation Protection Ordinance, 1991 was declared unconstitutional on certain grounds including the ground that it had extra territorial operation in as much as it interfered with the equitable rights of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry to the waters of Cauvery River.
In short, no law made by Parliament shall be deemed to be invalid on the ground that it would have extra territorial operation. However, the law made by the state legislature may be challenged on the ground of extra territorial operation. If the parent act is declared to be unconstitutional, then the delegated legislation made under such act would also be declared to be unconstitutional and thus, void. Article 246 makes provisions in respect of the distribution of powers between the powers between the Parliament and the State legislatures. From article 246 and the seventh schedule, it becomes clear that the subjects have been divided into three categories – Union list, State list and Concurrent list. Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the matters or subjects enumerated in the Union list and of the legislature of any state has power to make laws for such state or any part thereof with respect to any of the matters or subjects enumerated in the State list. Parliament and State Legislatures both have power to make laws with respect to any of the matters or subjects enumerated in the Concurrent List, but In the case of conflict between the law made by Parliament and a law made by the State Legislature with respect to such matter or subject, the law made by Parliament shall prevail and the laws made by the State Legislature, to the extent of repugnancy. be void, unless the law made by the State Legislature has received the assent of the President.
Implied limit: If the Enabling or Parent Act violates the implied limit of the Constitution, it will be ultra vires the Constitution and therefore It will be void and the delegated legislation made under the Act will also be unconstitutional and void. The implied limit of the Constitution Is that essential legislative function entrusted to the legislature by the Constitution cannot be delegated by it. The essential legislative function consists of the determination of the legislative policy and its formulation as a rule of conduct. The legislature delegating its legislative power must lay down the legislative policy and guidelines regarding the exercise of tin delegated power by delegate. The delegation of essential legislative function is taken as abdication of essential legislative function by the Legislature and this is not permitted by the Constitution
B. Delegated legislation is ultra vires the Enabling Act: The validity of the subordinate or delegated legislation can be challenged on the ground that it is ultra vires the Enabling or Parent Act. If the subordinate or delegated legislation made by the delegate is in excess of the power conferred by the Enabling or Parent Act or is in conflict with the provisions of the Enabling or Parent Act or is made w ithout following the procedure required by the Enabling or Parent Act to be followed by the delegate, the delegated or subordinate legislation will be invalid on the ground that it Is ultra vires the Enabling or Parent Act. The validity of the exercise of power is tested on the basis of the Prussians as it stands currently and not on the basis of that it was before.
C. When it is made in excess of the power conferred by the Enabling Act: The subordinate or delegated legislation is held to be ultra vires the Enabling or Parent Act when it is found to be in excess of the power conferred by the Enabling or Parent Act. If the delegated legislation is beyond the power conferred on the delegated by the Enabling Act, it would be Invalid even if it has been laid before the Legislature. Where an administrative authority Is empowered by the Enabling Act to make by-laws to regulate market and the authority makes by-law which prohibits running of cattle market the by-law will be ultra vires the Enabling Act. In S.T.O. v. Abraham  the Act empowered the Government to carry out the purposes of the Act the Government made rule so as to fix the last date for filing the declaration forms by dealers for getting the benefit of concessional rates on inter-State sales. This rule was held to be ultra vires the Enabling Act on the ground that the Act empowered the Government for making rules for prescribing the particulars to be mentioned in the forms and it was not given power to prescribe a time-limit for filling the form.
D. When delegated legislation is in conflict with the Enabling or Parent Act: When the delegated legislation is found to be directly or indirectly in conflict with the provisions of the Enabling Act or Parent Act, it is held to be ultra vires the Enabling or Parent Act. In Delhi Transport Undertaking v. B.R.I. Hajelay  , a rule was declared Invalid on the ground that it was in conflict with the provisions of the Enabling or Parent Act. According to Section 92 of the Delhi Corporation Act. 1957, all persons drawing salary less than 350 rupees per month shall be appointed only by general Manager of the Delhi Transport Undertaking. According to Section 95 of the Act, no person can be dismissed by any authority subordinate to the authority who has appointed him. The rules made under the Act empowered the General Manager to delegate all his powers to the Assistant General Manager. The rule was held to be In conflict with the aforesaid provision of the Parent Act. The effect of the rule was that a person appointed by the General Manager could be dismissed by the Assistant General Manager. i.e. a person could be dismissed by an authority subordinate to the authority who had appointed him while Section 95 of the Act provided that no person can be dismissed by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority. Thus, the rule was in conflict with Section 95 of the Act. Consequently the rule was held to be invalid.
Enabling Statute Is Ultra Vires The Constitution:
The word ‘Ultra' means beyond and ‘Vires' means powers. A simple meaning of this term is ‘beyond powers'; in a strict sense, therefore, the expression is used to mean any act performed in excess of powers of the authority or the person who performs the act. Judicial control of delegated may take different forms. There is rule of Constitutionality of delegated legislation. Doctrine of Ultra vires is another method of such control the courts have formulated yet another doctrine in which they search for legislative policy or guidance for a valid delegation of legislative power.
In a broader sense the ultra vires principle provided the justification for constraints upon the way in which the power given to the administrative agency was exercised. The agency must comply with rules of fair procedure, it must exercise its discretion to attain only proper and not improper purposes, it must act on relevant and not irrelevant considerations and it must not act unreasonably.18
As per Halsbury's Laws of England, "Ultra vires" in its proper sense denotes some act or transaction on the part of a corporation which although not unlawful or contrary to public policy if done by an individual is yet beyond the legislative powers of the corporations defined by the statue under which it is formed, or the statues which are applicable to it, or by its character or memorandum of association. In V.M. Kurian v .State of Kerala  , when the State Government of Kerala granted exemption from the operation of the Kerala building Rules 1984 for the construction of a high rise building in Cochin without the recommendation of greater Cochin Development authority and the Chief Town Planner as provided in the rules, the Supreme Court held that the order in ultra vires.
In case of interpretation of statute under which legislative power have been delegated is itself unconstitutional, then the delegated legislation originating from that statute will also be unconstitutional. Unconstitutionality may either be due to excessive delegation or breach of a fundamental right or any other Constitutional provision. For instance, if a statute contains a delegation clause involving the abridgement of fundamental rights, it is ultra vires the Constitution. Similarly, if a state legislature delegates the power to make rules on a subject falling in the union list, it is clearly beyond the powers of the state legislature and hence unconstitutional. In Chintamon Rao v State of M.P , the enabling empowered the Collector to make regulations for regulating or prohibiting the manufacture of bidis during the agricultural season. The purpose of this provision was to induce the laborers to engage in agricultural operations during the season and thus to improve production. The collector totally prohibited the manufacture of bidis during the agricultural season with a view of diverting the entire labour in to the agricultural sector. The statutory provision was struck down by the Court as it amounted to an unreasonable restriction upon the fundamental rights to carry on an occupation guaranteed by Art. 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution. Subordinated legislation was also held invalid because the enabling provision itself was unconstitutional.
Enabling statutes is important to ensure that provisions are in place which give the program and its representatives clear legal authority to access facilities and records. When problems with access arise, the enabling statutes are used as the tools to resolve these issues quickly. Those tools include the authority of the program or some other entity in the state . Thus, to draw conclusion it can be said that if the subordinate or delegated legislation goes beyond the scope of authority concerned on the delegate or it is in conflict with the Parent or Enabling Act, it is called substantive ultra vires. The validity of the subordinate or delegated legislation may be challenged before the Courts on this ground. It is a mechanism to curb down the exploitation of power by the administrative authority as we all know that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. However in this field there is lack of development and there is no substantial change in the concept all though the changing nature of the current legislative method has widen the horizon of the power of the authority by giving them power to act according to the need of the time, even sometimes travelling beyond the restrictions.
Prof. T. Bhattacharya, “The Interpretation of Statute”, 8th Edn, Central Law Publication.
1 AIR 1997 Cal 197
2 Biddi Leaves and Tobacco Merchant Associationv State of Bonbay, AIR 1962 SC 486.
3 In Re Dudley Corporation, (1882) 8 QBD 86 ( 93, 94), per Brett, LJ.
4 Sardar Govind Rao v. State of M.p., 1964 SC 269.
5 Clarence v. Great N. of England Rly., (1845) 13 M and W 706 (721)
6 The same concept has been given by Parke, B in Clarence Rly v. Great N. Eastern Rly. (1845) 13 M and W 706 (721) supra.
7 AIR 1962 SC 486.
8 Whiteman v. Sadler, (1910) AC 514(527), per Lord Dunedin.
9 Gopalswami v. Secretary of Sate, AIR 1933 Mad 748.
10 Craies – On Statute Law, 7th Edn, p, 259.
11 Digraj Kuer v. A.K. Narayan Singh, AIR 1960 SCC 444(449)
12 R v. Wilkes, (1770) & Burr, 2527 (2539), per Lord Mansfield.
13 Re Neath & Brecon Rly. Co. (1874) 9 Ch. App. 263 , per James, LJ.
14 Ramji Missar, v. St of Bihar, AIR 1963 SC 1088(1092), per , Ayyanger, J.
15 In The Matter Of Cauvery Water ... vs Date Of Judgment22/11/1991 on 22 November, 1991: Equivalent citations: 1992 AIR 522, 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 497 .
16 STO vs. K.I. Abraham  20 STC 367
17 1972 AIR 2452, 1973 SCR (2) 114 ... By the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957
18 P.P. Craig, Administrative Law, (London: Sweet and Maxwell Limited), 2003, p 5.
19 (2001) 4 SCC 215.
20 AIR 1951 SC 118.
||This article has been awarded Certificate of Excellence for Original Legal Research work by our Penal of Judges
Common Intention is known as a prearranged plan and acting in concert pursuant to the plan. It must be proved that the Criminal act was done in concert pursuant to the pre-arranged plan. It comes into being prior to the Commission of the act in point of time, yet it need not be a long gap. The gap need not be long sometimes common intention can be developed on the spot. The fundamental factor is a pre-arranged plan to execute the plan for the desired result. Each of such person will be liable in an act done in furtherance of common intention as if the act was done by one person. Common Intention does not mean the similar intention of several person. To constitute common intention, it is necessary that the intention of each one of them be known to the rest of them and shared by them...
| » Total Articles
| » Total Authors
| » Total Views
| » Total categories