Doctrine of Retrospective Operation of Interpretation of Statutes

Doctrine of Retrospective Operation of Interpretation of Statutes

Retrospective means looking back in the past for similar facts or events. When a existing law is changed or altered, fully or partially, it does not remain the same. But it might still have an influence on the past incidents. For example lets say a person committed an action in the past which was not an offence at that point of time. But due to change in the law, the action becomes a criminal offence. Under this new or changed law, the person could be held liable for the act even though this was not a crime at the time of committing the act.

Examples of Retrospective Laws

1. Karnataka Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978,

2. Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition (Revival of Operation, Amendment, and Validation) Act, 2019, 

General principles of retrospective operation of interpretation of statutes

Legislation cannot be implemented retrospectively to affect pre-existing rights unless expressly stated otherwise or by necessary implication. It entirely depends on the legislative intent. 

While considering the question of the statute's retrospective application, the nature of the affected right takes priority. An amendment will be viewed as prospective in order to protect the existing vested right.

In Arjan Singh v. State of Punjab, Justice Hegde stated "It is a well-established rule of construction that no provision in a statute should be given retrospective effect unless the Legislature has made it retrospective by express terms or by necessary implication, and that where a provision has been made retrospective, care should be taken not to extend its retrospective effect beyond what was intended”.

Power to make retrospective laws

The Union Parliament and State Legislatures has the rights for enacting both prospective and retrospective laws. Subject to the limitation imposed by Article 20(1), which states that a legislature cannot pass retrospective penal laws, the power to make a law includes the power to give it retrospective effect.

The ability to enact laws retrospectively is frequently used to uphold earlier legislative and executive Acts. This rectifies the flaws that rendered the earlier Acts and laws invalid. 

Substantive Laws

The statutes that deal with substantive rights are deemed to be prospective only. They must not be interpreted retrospectively, unless the intention is made explicit through express words or necessary implication.

Procedural Laws

Statutes addressing merely procedural issues are generally presumed to be retrospective unless unless specifically prohibited.   Generally, a procedural statute should not be applied retrospectively if doing so would result in the creation of new limitations or obligations or the imposition of new obligations with regard to transactions that have already been accomplished.

In Shyam Sunder v. Ram Kumar, the Supreme Court stated "No person has a vested right in any course of the procedure. He only has the right to prosecute or defend in the way currently prescribed by or for the court where the case is pending, and if by an Act of Parliament, the mode of procedure is altered, he has no other right but to proceed in accordance with the altered mode”.

In New India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Shanti Misra, it was decided that if a new Act mandates that certain types of original proceedings be brought before a special tribunal instead of civil courts, then all such proceedings, regardless of whether they are based on previous or new causes of action, must be brought before that tribunal.

Limitations on enacting retrospective laws

Retrospective operation is generally only limited to the extent that it has been explicitly stated as such or necessary implications have been made. However, there is no set method for retrospectively expressing the legislative intent.

In the National Agricultural Coop. Mktg. Federation of India Ltd. v. Union of India limitations were laid out on the legislature's power to enact new laws or amend existing ones retrospectively. 

Conclusion

It is now settled that a statute should not be given retrospective effect in order to alter or impair an existing right, create a new obligation, or impose a new liability other than as it relates to procedural matters unless the terms of the statute expressly provide for it or necessarily require it. This is the general rule for all statutes other than those that are merely declaratory or that only deal with matters of procedure or evidence.

CCSU LLB / BA-LLB Question References

Q. Whether an act can be enforced retrospectively? Explain. [BA-LLB - 10 marks - 2022]