https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275169 A mandatory punishment provision requiring imprisonment and fine cannot be reinterpreted as imprisonment or fine to accommodate a corporate offender, because that would amount to judicial legislation. The Court held that where statutory language is clear, purposive interpretation and related maxims cannot justify departing from the plain text, and punishment cannot be selectively applied by replacing the imprisonment component with a fine. It therefore affirmed the majority view in Velliappa Textiles Ltd. and confirmed that any change to the scheme must come from Parliament, not judicial rewriting. en-us Thu, 05 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Sep 2018 15:58:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275169 A mandatory punishment provision requiring imprisonment and fine cannot be reinterpreted as imprisonment or fine to accommodate a corporate offender, because that would amount to judicial legislation. The Court held that where statutory language is clear, purposive interpretation and related maxims cannot justify departing from the plain text, and punishment cannot be selectively applied by replacing the imprisonment component with a fine. It therefore affirmed the majority view in Velliappa Textiles Ltd. and confirmed that any change to the scheme must come from Parliament, not judicial rewriting. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275169