SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL (DEEMED UNIVERSITY)

(Established under Section 3 of the UGC Act 1956)

Re-accredited by NAAC with ‘A’ grade (3.58/4) Awarded Category – I by UGC

Program: BBA.LLB(H)
Batch: 2018-23
Semester: VI
Course Name: Judicial Process & Interpretation of Statutes
PRN: 18010126013
Name of the Student: Arindam Arav Prakash

INSTRUCTIONS
1. Mention your details only in the space provided above. If any other details
name, contact detail etc. are written anywhere else in the answer script it will
be treated as adoption of unfair means.
2. Use diagrams and sketches wherever required.
3. Submission must be done by the student through google form link provided
by the examination department and all submissions must be in the word
format only(.doc/.docx). Submission of any other format will not accepted.
4. Submission will not be accepted beyond the deadline given by the
examination department in each subject. Student will be marked absent in
case of late submission.
5. Formatting guidelines: Font size & name: 12 & Times New Roman; Line
spacing 1.5; Justified; Page size: A4; No borders
6. Write your answer in your own language and do not copy paste from any
source. Read the question carefully and write your answer fulfilling the
requirements of the question.
7. If the students copy from each other’s assignment, it will be considered as
unfair means case and performance will be treated as null and void for the
entire examination.
Answer 1.) Public Interest litigation has been interpreted by judges to consider the intent
of public at large. Although, the main and only focus of such litigation is only Public Interest
there are various areas where a Public interest litigation can be filed. For e.g.

- Violation of basic human rights of the poor

- Content or conduct of government policy

- Compel municipal authorities to perform a public duty.

- Violation of religious rights or other basic fundamental rights

In India, the emergency period (1975-1977) witnessed colonial nature of the Indian legal
system. During emergency state repression and governmental lawlessness was widespread.
Thousands of innocent people including political opponents were sent to jails and there was
complete deprivation of civil and political rights. The post emergency period provided an
occasion for the judges of the Supreme Court to openly disregard the impediments of Anglo-
Saxon procedure in providing access to justice to the poor.

Public Interest Litigation popularly known as PIL can be broadly defined as litigation in the
interest of public in general. Prior to 1980s, only the aggrieved party could personally knock
the doors of justice and seek remedy for his grievance and any other person who was not
personally affected could not knock the doors of justice as a proxy for the victim or the
aggrieved party. Only the affected parties had the locus standi (standing required in law) to
file a case and continue the litigation and the non affected persons had no locus standi to do
so. And as a result, there was hardly any link between the rights guaranteed by the
Constitution of Indian , Union and the laws made by the legislature on the one hand and the
vast majority of illiterate citizens on the other. The traditional view in regard to locus standi
in Writ jurisdiction has been that only such persons who: a) Has suffered a legal injury by
reason of violation of his legal right or legally protected interest; or b) Is likely to suffer a
legal injury by reason of violation of his legal right or legally protected interest. Thus before
a person acquired locus standi he had to have a personal or individual right which was
violated or threatened to be violated. He should have been a person aggrieved in the sense
that he had suffered or was likely to suffer from prejudice, pecuniary or otherwise.

However, all these scenario gradually changed when the post emergency Supreme Court
tackled the problem of access to justice by people through radical changes and alterations
made in the requirements of locus standi and of party aggrieved. The efforts of Justice P N
Bhagwati and Justice V R Krishna Iyer were instrumental of this juristic revolution of
eighties to convert the Apex Court of India into a Supreme Court for all Indians. Justice V. R.
Krishna Iyer and P. N. Bhagwati recognised the possibility of providing access to justice to
the poor and the exploited people by relaxing the rules of standing. In the post-emergency
period when the political situations had changed, investigative journalism also began to
expose gory scenes of governmental lawlessness, repression, custodial violence, drawing
attention of lawyers, judges, and social activists. PIL emerged as a result of an informal nexus
of pro-active judges, media persons and social activists. This trend shows starke difference
between the traditional justice delivery system and the modern informal justice system where
the judiciary is performing administrative judicial role. PIL is necessary rejection of laissez
faire notions of traditional jurisprudence. The liberal interpretation of locus standi where any
person can apply to the court on behalf of those who are economically or physically unable to
come before it has helped. Judges themselves have in some cases initiated suo moto action
based on newspaper articles or letters received.

The first reported case of PIL in 1979 focused on the inhuman conditions of prisons and
under trial prisoners. In Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, the PIL was filed by an
advocate on the basis of the news item published in the Indian Express, highlighting the
plight of thousands of undertrial prisoners languishing in various jails in Bihar. These
proceeding led to the release of more than 40,000 undertrial prisoners. Right to speedy justice
emerged as a basic fundamental right which had been denied to these prisoners. The same set
pattern was adopted in subsequent cases. A new era of the PIL movement was heralded by
Justice P.N. Bhagawati in the case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India. In this case it was held
that any member of the public or social action group acting bonafide can invoke the Writ
Jurisdiction of the High Courts or the Supreme Court seeking redressal against violation of a
legal or constitutional rights of persons who due to social or economic or any other disability
cannot approach the Court. By this judgment PIL became a potent weapon for the
enforcement of public duties where executed in action or misdeed resulted in public injury.
And as a result any citizen of India or any consumer groups or social action groups can now
approach the apex court of the country seeking legal remedies in all cases where the interests
of general public or a section of public are at stake. In 1981 the case of Anil Yadav v. State of
Bihar, exposed the brutalities of the Police. News paper report revealed that about 33
suspected criminals were blinded by the police in Bihar by putting the acid into their eyes.
Through interim orders Supreme Court directed the State government to bring the blinded
men to Delhi for medical treatment. It also ordered speedy prosecution of the guilty
policemen. The court also read right to free legal aid as a fundamental right of every accused.
Anil Yadav signalled the growth of social activism and investigative litigation.

Remedial nature of PIL departs from traditional locus standi rules. It indirectly incorporated
the principles enshrined in the Part IV of the Constitution of India into Part III of the
Constitution. By riding the aspirations of Part IV into Part III of the Constitution had changed
the procedural nature of the Indian law into dynamic welfare one. Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs.
Union of India, Unni Krishnan vs. State of A.P., etc. were the obvious examples of this
change in nature of judiciary. The strict rule of locus standi has been relaxed by way of (a)
Representative standing, and (b) Citizen standing. In D.C. Wadhwa vs. State of
Bihar,Supreme Court held that a petitioner, a professor of political science who had done
substantial research and deeply interested in ensuring proper implementation of the
constitutional provisions, challenged the practice followed by the state of Bihar in re-
promulgating a number of ordinances without getting the approval of the legislature. The
court held that the petitioner as a member of public has sufficient interest to maintain a
petition under Article 32. Public interest litigation has come to stay and its necessity cannot
be overemphasized. The courts evolved a jurisprudence of compassion. Procedural propriety
was to move over giving place to substantive concerns of the deprivation of rights. The rule
of locus standi was diluted. The Court in place of disinterested and dispassionate adjudicator
became active participant in the dispensation of justice.

Answer 2.) Interpretation means the art of knowing the real sense of an enactment by
giving its natural and ordinary meaning to the words of the enactment. It is the method of
evaluating the true value of the terms used in a statute. It is not assumed that the Court will
view it arbitrarily and, thus, these concepts have evolved from the continuous exercise by the
courts. It must be applied to actual circumstances once the law has been established. In every
situation, it is impossible for Parliament to spell out how a statute should apply. Accordingly,
it is obligatory for the judiciary to expound the framework as provided by the Parliament & to
give its words an effect. This approach is interpreted as statutory interpretation. It is
necessary to understand the different factors that can generate confusion about legislative
significance before contemplating the way that judges view legislation.
The three standard approaches to legislative interpretation will now be considered. The
Literal Rule requires the judge to allow their ordinary and natural significance to the words of
the statute, whether or not the interpretation's effect is to provide an unjust or undesirable
result. The Golden Rule is taken into account in a furtherance of the Literal Rule. It comes
into operation where the execution of the Literal Rule will result in absurdity. There may be
one of every two types of the Golden Law. The third rule is that the mischief rule. It is called
the most flexible rule and was first used in the case of Heydon. The word statutory
interpretation applies to the conduct of judiciary in attempting to recognise and justifying the
meaning of a legislative piece andso can be called art in place of science. On the basis of
interpretation, several cases go to appeal. Firstly, legislation must be drafted in extensive and
plain phraseology and essentially deal with both current and subsequent circumstances.
Sometimes, a legislation which was formulated to cure an specific problem would ultimately
be extended to varying circumstances. Laws are framed by draughtsmen, and the capacity of
a draughtsman to foresee the subsequent events is finite. He may not anticipate any potential
for the future or omit a viable misinterpretation of the legislation's initial intents. Another
challenge is a particular piece of legislation also attempts to deal with issues that include
various and competing interests. There are several words with more than one meaning in both
legal and general English. With this being the case, many ambiguities can be found in even
the best written legislation. This is not the fault on the part of the draughtsman, but a result of
the fact that public would inevitably find different meanings in the language used when they
look at a text from different points of view. Three fundamental principles of statutory
interpretation are usually followed by judges in India, and analogous rules are also
implemented in various other jurisdictions under the common law. The rules are named as
golden, literal, and mischief. While judiciary is not specifically provided with the necessity to
use rules of this sort while interpreting a statute, one of these three methods is normally
followed, and the method of interpretation taken by any specific judge is always a
manifestation of the philosophy that such a judge follows.

There are certain reasons why statutory interpretation is necessary and these are the following
reasons: Inconsistency, unclear and ambiguous language can arise from the ambiguity of the
laws regarding the essence of the subject, various draughtsmen and the combination of legal
and technical language. Future occurrence expectation leads to the use of indeterminate
words. The unlikely job of predicting any possible scenario often contributes to the
indeterminate language use.
Therefore, because of the holes in laws, judges have to interpret statutes. Words such as
rational are examples of indeterminate vocabulary. In this case , the courts are responsible for
deciding what the word fair constitutes. Words may have several meanings and definitions.
The description and sense of the language most advantageous to their individual needs will be
used by each party in court. The most accurate use of the vocabulary employed is up to the
courts to determine.Henceon the basis of above interferences we can say that interpretation of
statues is not only a scientific process but also an art.

Answer 3.) The General Clause Act, 1897 is that sort of act which lay down the essential
principle on how the law should be interpreted. It’s also referred to as the interpretation act.
The clause provides legal terms, methodologies, and expressions that help to get rid of
repetition and also provides a typical set of principles which is employed in legislation. It
provides rules on interpretation and expression to define things more clearly. Article 367(1)
of the Constitution states that the General Clauses Act, 1897 (subject to the adaptations and
modification made under Article 372) shall apply for the interpretation of the Constitution.
The relevant extract is as under:

“367(1) Unless the context otherwise requires, the General Clauses Act, 1897, shall, subject
to any adaptations and modifications that may be made therein under Article 372, apply for
the interpretation of this Constitution as it applies for the interpretation of an Act of the
Legislature of the Dominion of India.”

Thus, the General Clause Act applies only for the interpretation of constitution. The General
Clauses Act defines various terms in section 3. These definitions will apply for the
interpretation when these words are employed in the Constitution. The Act defines ‘affidavit’
as an assertion and declaration by persons who are authorized by law to do so or proclaim
other than for swearing. According to the Act a ‘document’ shall comprise of any written
subject, expressed or depicted upon any material in the mode of letter, numbers or marks or
other modes that is planned to be utilized to record that subject. An ‘immovable property’
means any land, profits that obtained from the land and the things that are appended to the
earth or enduringly fastened to any object that are appended to the earth. A ‘movable
property’ means the property of all kind but not including immovable property. The Act
further defines a ‘person’ as a company or organization or group of individuals, whether such
body is incorporated or not.
The Act explains the meaning of ‘regulation’ formulated by the President according to
Article 240 and Article 243 of the Constitution and shall comprise of regulations made under
the Government of India Act, 1870 or Government of India Act, 1915 or Government of
India Act, 1935 by the Central Government. The ‘rule’ shall mean rule made in exercise of
the authority of any legislation and the regulation issued as a rule framed under the
legislation.

Where legislation is not specifically mentioned to come into force on a prescribed date, it
shall be implemented on the day that it receives the assent of the Governor General before the
commencement of the Indian Constitution and thereafter of the President. The regulation
shall come into force instantly on the ending of the day prior to its commencement unless
expressly provided. Where any Central legislation or any regulation enacted after the
commencement of this Act repeals any Act made or yet to be made, unless another purpose
exists, the repeal shall not:

 Renew anything not enforced or prevailed during the period at which repeal is
effected or;
 Affect the prior management of any legislation that is repealed or anything performed
or undergone or;
 Affect any claim, privilege, responsibility or debt obtained, ensued or sustained under
any legislation so repealed or;
 Affect any punishment, forfeiture or penalty sustained with regard to any offence
committed as opposed to any legislation or
 Affect any inquiry, litigation or remedy with regard to such claim, privilege, debt or
responsibility or any inquiry, litigation or remedy may be initiated, continued or
insisted.

In any Central legislation or regulation framed subsequent to the enforcement of the

legislation, it shall be essential to revive any legislation either entirely or partly repealed
expressly to provide the purpose. Furthermore, if the present legislation or any Central
enactment or regulation made subsequent to the enactment, repeals or restructure with or
without amendments of the prior legislation, then the indication in any other legislation or
any other mechanism to the provision that has been repealed shall be interpreted as indication
to the provision that has been re-enacted. If any Central legislation or regulation made after
the implementation of any legislation or procedure is ordered or permitted to be performed or
taken in any Court or office on a particular day or within specified time, then if the Court or
office is not opened on that day or last day of the specified period, the legislation or
proceedings shall be deemed to be performed or taken in due time if it is performed or taken
on the subsequent day afterward the Court reopens.The General Clauses Act is very effective
in the absence of clear definition in the specific enactments and where there is a conflict
between the pre-constitutional laws and post-constitutional laws. The Act gives a clear
suggestion for the conflicting provisions and differentiates the legislation according to the
commencement and enforcement to avoid uncertainty.

Ans 4.) (a) Illustrations as an internal aid of interpretation - Illustrations are sometimes
appended to a section of a statute with a view to illustrate the provision of law explained
therein. A very large number of Indian Acts have illustrations appended to various sections.
They being the show of mind of the legislature are a good guide to find out the intention of
the farmers. But an enactment otherwise clear cannot be given an extended or a restricted
meaning on the basis of illustrations appended therein. The Supreme Court in Mahesh Chand
Sharma v. Raj Kumari Sharma observed that illustration is a part of the section and it helps to
elucidate the principle of the section. However, illustrations cannot be used to defeat the
provision or to modify the language of the section. This is reflected by a legal maxim
“Exampla illustrant, non-restringent legem” which means examples only illustrate but do not
narrow the scope of rule of a law. In Mudliyar Chatterjee v. International Film Co., it was
observed that in construing a section, an illustration cannot be ignored or brushed aside.
In Mohommed Sydeol Ariffin v. Yeah Ooi Gark, it was held that the illustrations are of
relevance and value in the construction of the text of the section, although they donot form
part of the section. Therefore, they should not be readily rejected as repugnant to the sections.

(b) Literal/Grammatical rule of Interpretation- It is the first rule of interpretation. According

to this rule, the words used in this text are to be given or interpreted in their natural or
ordinary meaning. After the interpretation, if the meaning is completely clear and
unambiguous then the effect shall be given to a provision of a statute regardless of what may
be the consequences. The basic rule is that whatever the intention legislature had while
making any provision it has been expressed through words and thus, are to be interpreted
according to the rules of grammar. It is the safest rule of interpretation of statutes because the
intention of the legislature is deduced from the words and the language used.
According to this rule, the only duty of the court is to give effect if the language of the statute
is plain and has no business to look into the consequences which might arise. The only
obligation of the court is to expound the law as it is and if any harsh consequences arise then
the remedy for it shall be sought and looked out by the legislature. Maqbool Hussain v. State
of Bombay,  In this case, the appellant, a citizen of India after arriving at the airport did not
declare that he was carrying gold with him. During his search was carried on, gold was found
in his possession as it was against the notification of the government and was confiscated
under section 167(8) of Sea Customs Act.  Later on, he was also charged under section 8 of
the Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, 1947.  The appellant challenged this trial to be
violative under Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution. According to this article, no person
shall be punished or prosecuted more than once for the same offence. This is considered as
double jeopardy. It was held by the court that the Seas Act neither a court nor any judicial
tribunal. Thus, accordingly, he was not prosecuted earlier. Hence, his trial was held to be
valid.

Answer 5.) Laws enacted by the legislatures are interpreted by the judiciary. Enacted
laws, especially the modern Acts and Rules, are drafted by legal experts and it could be
expected that the language will leave little room for interpretation or construction. But the
experience of all who have to hear and share the task of application of the law has been
different. It is quite often observed that courts are busy unfolding the meaning of ambiguous
words and expressions and resolving inconsistencies. The age-old process of the application
of the enacted laws has led to the formulation of certain rules of interpretation or
construction. The object of interpretation of statutes 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.
Internal aids means those aids which are available in the statute itself, court can interpret the
statute by employing such aids which are as follows:

A.) Title of the statute - There are basically two types of title-

I. Short Title- The short title of the Act is only its name which is given solely for the purpose
of reference and identification. Short title is mention under Section 1 of the Acts and ends
with the year of passing of the Act. Example- Section 1 of CPC says, This Act may be cited
as Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.' Section 1 of Indian contract Acts says, This Act may be
called as Indian Contract Act, 1872.

II. Long Title - The long title is mention under certain acts whose purpose is to give a general
description about the object of the act. However, it is not considered as a conclusive aid to
interpretation of statutes as it doesn't resolve ambiguity arising in words or expression under
statutory provision but only provide a general idea of the act. Example- The long title of
CrPC says, An act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the criminal procedure. Also,
the long title of CPC says, “An act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the
procedure of the courts of civil judicature.

B.) Preamble - Preamble is a tool for internal aid to interpretation as it contains the main
objects and reasons of the Act. The rule of interpretation of preamble is that when a language
of an enactment is clear and unambiguous, the preamble has no part to play but if more than
one interpretation is possible, a help can be taken from preamble to ascertain the true
meaning of the provision. The preamble is mention on the very first page of the act but
modern acts doesn't pass with preamble which is declining its importance. In State of West
Bengal v. Anwar Ali , the constitutionality of Section 5 of the West Bengal special courts act,
1950 was challenged on the grounds of violative of Article 14 of the constitution as the
provision in the act authorize state government to select a particular case which deserved to
be tried by special courts having special procedure. The Supreme Court take help of the
preamble of the said Act and held that state government has discretion to choose such cases.

C.) Marginal notes - Marginal notes are inserted at the side of the sections in an act which
express the effect of the section but they are not part of statute.They are also known as Side
notes and are inserted by drafters and not legislators.The rule of interpretation is that in olden
times a help is used to be taken from marginal notes when the clear meaning of the provision
is in doubt but as per modern view of the court, marginal notes doesn't have any role to play
because either they are inserted by legislators nor does they form the part of the statute.
However, for interpreting constitution many times marginal notes are referred because they
are made by constituent assembly. In Bengal Immunity Company v. State of Bihar , the
Supreme Court held that the marginal notes of Article 286 is the part of the Constitution of
India which talks about Restrictions as to imposition of the tax on the sale or purchase of
goods therefore, it could be relied on to furnish a clue to the purpose and meaning of the
article.
D.) Headings - Headings are prefixed to sections or a group or set of sections. These headings
have been treated by courts as preambles to those sections or sets of sections. The rule of
interpretation is that the heading can't control the plain words of the provision but if after the
plain reading of the section more than one meaning is possible, only then the court may seek
guidance from the headings. In Tolley v. Giddings , interpretation of section 217 of Road
Traffic Act was in question which provides that a person could be held liable of an offence if
he allowed himself to be driven away in a motor vehicle without the consent of its master.
The heading of the provision is Miscellaneous and general' and sub heading is Penalization of
taking motor vehicle without authority'. The court held that headings to the section clearly
explain the intention of the legislature and thus the passenger would be held liable of an
offence.

E.) Illustration - Example- Section 378 of theft in IPC has 16 illustrations attached to it.

F.) Explanation - Example- section 108 of IPC defines the word abettor' which has five
explanation attach to it.

G.) Definition or Interpretation clause

H.) Punctuation

I.) Schedules - Example- Article 1 of the constitution provides that India shall be union of
states and in schedule 1 name of the states with its territories are mention.

J.) Saving Clause

K.) Provison - Example- Article 16(4) is considered as provison of Article 16(1) held in T.
Devadasan v. Union of India

L.) Exception - Example: Section 300 of IPC has five exceptions attached to it.

Answer 6.) The Judiciary has been assigned active role under the constitution. Judicial
activism and judicial restraint are facets of that uncourageous creativity and pragmatic
wisdom. The concept of Judicial activism is thus the polar opposite of Judicial restraint.
Judicial activism and Judicial restraint are the two terms used to describe the philosophy and
motivation behind some judicial decision. At most level, judicial activism refers to a theory
of judgment that takes into account the spirit of the law and the changing times, while judicial
restraint relies on a strict interpretation of the law and the importance of legal precedent.
Judicial Restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the
exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless
they are obviously unconstitutional. Judicially-restrained judges respect stare-decisis, the
principle of upholding established precedent handed down by past judges.

Judicial restraint, a procedural or substantive approach to the exercise of judicial review. As a

procedural doctrine, the principle of restraint urges judges to refrain from deciding legal
issues, and especially constitutional ones, unless the decision is necessary to the resolution of
a concrete dispute between adverse parties. As a substantive one, it urges judges considering
constitutional questions to grant substantial deference to the views of the elected branches
and invalidate their actions only when constitutional limits have clearly been violated.
Judges should always try to decide cases on the basis of:
1. The original intent of those who wrote the constitution.
2. Precedent – past decisions in earlier cases.
3. The court should leave policy making to others.

Under Article 121 the Parliament is restricted to discuss the conduct of any judge of the
Supreme Court or any High Court. Similarly, the Courts are restricted to inquire into the
legislative proceedings under Article 212. Hence, it is clear that the Constitution does not see
the judiciary as the substitute for the legislature or the executive upon their failure in any
sense. The judiciary is required to set its own limitation. Here comes the role of judicial
restraint.  the case of State of Rajasthan vs Union of India is the perfect example of the
application of the doctrine of separation of powers in promoting judicial restraint, where the
court deemed it fit to not indulge in the matter as it was highly related to political matters.
Justice A.S.Anand, former CJI said that judges must follow self-discipline in exercising their
judicial functions as if judicial restraint is not observed, each judge will create a new law
himself resulting in huge chaos. Thus, to limit the judges to exercise their powers according
to their own opinions and personal fancies, judicial restraint is crucial. 

An example of the misuse of powers by the judiciary is J.P.Unnikrishnan vs State of Andhra

Pradesh, where the courts read Article 37 while interpreting Article 21 of the Constitution. It
is important to note that Article 37 is a Directive principle of State Policy, which is a socio-
economic ideal, unenforceable in the law. On the other hand, Article 21 is a Fundamental
Right. Hence, the principle of judicial activism led the court to follow a different path as
compared to the intention of the makers of the constitution.  

As the principle of separation of powers is already established, the judge has a limited role to
follow and apply the law made by the legislature. Supporters of the notion of judicial restraint
believe that the judge is required to administer a law regardless of its fairness to the public
policy. However, strict implementation can have adverse effects despite the pure object of
any legislation. The evaluation of the role of the judiciary has disclosed that the duties of a
judge are circumscribed to be that of a legislator too. The drafters of any legislation cannot
comprehend the infinite possibilities of occurrences out of the same field of law. It is
generally impossible for a law to cover all the prospects of a situation and make a provision
for its mandate or rectification or remedy.

Therefore, the chances of outcome are vast making it inevitable for any enactment to leave
some of the corners of possibilities unaddressed. There can be a set of facts which are
unimaginable by a pre-existing generality of law. In such cases, the judge is bound to read
into the minds of the makers of the legislation for the purpose of its interpretation and deliver
an appropriate decision. Hence, the judge steps into the shoes of the legislator so as to decide
upon the case. Here, the strict interpretation of judicial restraint and doctrine of separation of
powers would render the judgement useless or maybe, non-viable.

If judges take up the tasks of the executive and legislature in their own hands then some
issues are bound to arise such as lack of expertise and distorting the doctrine of separation of
powers. But then the Indian scenario also requires the creativity and application of personal
minds of the judges while interpretation due to the complexity of cases in the present times.