people say that this interpretation favours the state by broadening laws to benefit the state (so they don't have to amend or make seperate laws dealing with newer variations of a crime) , is this true ? doesn't a purposive approach have to take factors such as "intention at the time" etc ?

the purposive approach choses the interpretation that furthers the purpose of a legislature. but does it take into account things like if a broadly worded law was intended to he applicable to particular cases or not (example if such a case was taken into account, would the drafters want the case to fall within th scope of the law or not)