AIR 1994 SUPREME COURT 1775 ::1994 AIR SCW 1656 ::(1995) 58 ECR 632 ::(1995) 2 MahLR 49 ::(1994) 70 ELT 12 ::(1994) 46 ECC 255 ::(1994) 53 DLT 527 ::(1994) AllCriC 260 ::1994 CriLR(SC&MP) 201 ::1994 (3) SCC 440 ::1994 SCC (Cri) 785 ::(1994) 1 RecCriR 690 ::1994 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 201 ::(1994) 1 AllCriLR 419 ::(1994) 2 BLJ 629 ::1994 BLJR 2 912 ::(1995) 82 ComCas 103 ::(1994) 2 Guj LH 603 ::(1994) 1 SCR 445 (SC) ::(1994) 1 Crimes 892 ::(1994) SC Cr R 514 ::(1994) 2 EFR 394 ::(1994) 1 JT 290 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Delhi - 1991 Cri LJ 1124 (FB))

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. Ratnavel Pandian, K. Jayachandra Reddy , JJ

(A) Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (46 of 1973) , Preamble— Customs Act (52 of 1962) , Preamble— Scope and object - Intention of legislature - Acts were passed for their ostensible purposes, vital of which being economic development of country and augmentation of revenue. Interpretation of Statutes - Intention of legislature - Court can look into and sometimes may even go behind words and enactment to give effect to legislative intention. Normally Courts should be slow to pronounce the legislature to have been mistaken in its constantly manifested opinion upon a matter resting wholly within its will and take its plain ordinary grammatical meaning of the words of the enactment as affording the best guide, but to winch up the legislative intent, it is permissible for Courts to take into account of the ostensible purpose and object and the real legislative intent. Otherwise, a bare mechanical interpretation of the words and application of the legislative intent devoid of concept of purpose and object will render the legislature inane. In cases of this kind, the question is not what the words in the relevant provision mean but whether there are certain grounds for inferring that the legislature intended to exclude jurisdiction of the Courts from authorising the detention of an arrestee whose arrest was effected on the ground that there is reason ....