What is the Doctrine or the Rule of Implied Prohibition?

 INTRODUCTION

 

Today, I will talk about the case of Apex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 221, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court inter alia discussed the Doctrine or the Rule of Implied Prohibition.

 

MEANING

 

The Doctrine of Implied Prohibition is a principle of statutory interpretation according to which, when a law or a statute directs that a thing is to be done in a certain way, then even if there are no negative connotations or words attached to it, that thing shall not be done in any other way. The basic premise behind this doctrine is that “the Court must, as far as possible, attach a construction which effectuates the legislative intent and purpose.”

 

LATIN MAXIMS

 

It is important to understand that the Rule or Doctrine of Implied Prohibition does not prohibit usage of reasonable means to make effective the power granted or conferred by a statute. This interpretative rule also stems from the Latin Maxim “Cui jurisdictio data est, ea quoque concessa esse videntur, sine quibus jurisdictio explicari non potuit” that literally means that “the grant of jurisdiction implies the grant of all powers necessary to its exercise.” In the case of Chief Executive Officer & Vice-Chairman, Gujarat Maritime Board v. Haji Daud Haji Harun Abu, (1996) 11 SCC 23, it was held that “the conferral of incidental and ancillary powers necessarily flows from the conferral of the substantive power.”

 

Further, when a law does not provide for the prohibitions on exercise of any power conferred by it, then logic, rationality and public policy serve as a beacon of light to ascertain the implied prohibitions or abstentions on the exercise of such power.

 

The Hon’ble Court also explained that “no court will lend its aid to a party that roots its cause of action in an immoral or illegal act (ex dolo malo non oritur action) meaning that none should be allowed to profit from any wrongdoing.” Also, the literal meaning of ex dolo malo non oritur action is that “an action does not arise from a fraud.”

 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

 

Therefore, in conclusion, following important points emerge with respect to the Doctrine of Implied Prohibition: -

 

a. Rule of Implied Prohibition entails that when a law or a statute directs that a thing is to be done in a certain way, then even if there are no negative connotations or words attached to it, that thing shall not be done in any other way.

 

b. This Rule does not prohibit usage of reasonable means to make effective the power granted or conferred by a statute.

 

c. Logic, rationality and public policy serve as a beacon of light to ascertain the implied prohibitions or abstentions on the exercise of a power.

 

d. There cannot be any interpretation in favour of a party that roots its cause of action in an immoral or illegal act.

 

Thus, I hope that the basic meaning of the Doctrine or the Rule of Implied Prohibition is clear by now.