From Legislative Prose To Judicial Prose: Who Writes More Clearly?
Arshiya Nandal, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Bhavya Singh, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), National Law Institute University, Bhopal
Prisha Narayan, B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), National Law Institute University, Bhopal
ABSTRACT
Indian legislation frequently becomes complex through amendments, incorporation, provisos, cross-references, and attempts at exhaustive precision. Courts confronted with such texts must translate them into rules that can be applied. This paper compares legislative and judicial prose through three case studies: Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; the arrest provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; and the tribunal provisions of the Companies Act, 2013. It argues that Indian judges have, in specific contexts, become effective second-stage plain-language drafters. Decisions such as Afcons Infrastructure, Arnesh Kumar and the Madras Bar Association cases reorganise dense statutory material into principles, categories and operational directions. Judicial prose nevertheless carries its own problems of length, fragmentation and precedential uncertainty. The paper, therefore, proposes a limited conclusion: judges often write the applicable rule more clearly because interpretation forces them to expose connections that legislative drafting leaves embedded in statutory architecture.
Keywords: legislative drafting, judicial writing, plain language, statutory interpretation, legal clarity
