The forefathers of our nation have done a monumental work on creating the unparalleled document of the Constitution of the Republic of India in the written form. Although this document of the Constitution can be positioned to be at the status of near flawlessness, due to the passage of time there arises certain ambiguities or mischiefs which can be attributed to the changing conditions and purposes. The constitution of India being a written constitution, the Indian Judiciary faces a consequential obstacle when it comes to the interpretation of certain parts of Constitution and certain statutes due the ambiguities and mischiefs arising out of the rationales mentioned above. This also is the case of the other executive and administrative bodies which also face complications in the interpretation of these mischiefs in the statutes and laws. This obstacle is addressed by the Indian judiciary by the help of a distinctive type of construction which is the Reasonable Construction. This construction is also known as the mischief rule as it is particularly involved in the rectification of the mischiefs emerging out of the interpretation of statutes. But it is sometimes argued that the Indian constitution being a written constitution have no place for this kind of interpretation. Thus in the research paper we will ponder deep into this concept with the assistance of various case laws and address this question.