The doctrine of prospective overruling is an American doctrine. It was
applied in India for the first time by the Supreme Court in the Golak Nath
case (1967).
When a court overrules its earlier decision and announces a new ruling,
it can restrict the application of the new ruling only to future
transactions so that the validity of the past transactions is not affected.
Important Cases: Golak Nath case (1967), Mandal case (1992),
Karunakar case (1993)
Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
When different provisions of the constitution are in conflict with each
other, the courts should interpret them harmoniously to avoid the
conflictual implications between them. This doctrine is also called the rule
of avoidance of conflict.
The Basic Structure Doctrine applies in cases involving: Conflict
between fundamental rights and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP),
Conflicting fundamental right, Disputes between fundamental rights and
legislative privileges etc.
Important Cases: O.N. Mohindroo vs. Bar Council of Delhi (1968)
Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973)
The Doctrine of Liberal Interpretation
According to the doctrine of liberal interpretation, the Constitution
must be interpreted in a broad and liberal manner and not in a narrow or
pedantic sense. According to SC "A constitutional provision is never static;
it is ever evolving and ever-changing and, therefore, does not admit of a
narrow, pedantic or syllogistic approach.".
The Doctrine of Literal Interpretation
This doctrine is also known as the doctrine of strict construction or
the doctrine of positivist construction. According to this doctrine, the
provisions of the constitution should be expounded in their plain, ordinary,
natural, and grammatical meaning.
The Doctrine of Purposive Interpretation
The Doctrine of Purposive Interpretation says that the courts while
making an interpretation of the constitution, should look into the purpose
for incorporating a provision in the Constitution. It emphasizes that the
constitutional interpretation should ascertain the intention of the makers
of the Constitution.
The Doctrine of Creative Interpretation
The doctrine of creative interpretation envisages an innovative judicial
interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution. This doctrine says
that the courts should evolve new concepts and new procedures in order to
meet the requirements of the changing situations. The judgment delivered by
the SC in the Golak Nath case (1967) is an important illustration of the
doctrine of creative interpretation.
