CONSTI

TUTI
ONALLAW NOTES(FORQUI
CKREVI
SION)

MODULE1

1.
1‘St
ate’
underar
ti
cle12
Meani
ngofSt
ateunderAr
ti
cle12
Ar
ti
cl
e12oft
heI
ndi
anConst
it
uti
onst
atest
hat
,
“Def
init
ion i
nt hi
s part
,unl ess the contextotherwise r
equires,t
he Stateincl
udes t
he
GovernmentandPar l
iamentofI ndiaandtheGov ernmentandt heLegisl
atur
eofeachofthe
Stat
esandal ll
ocalorotherauthori
tieswit
hintheterr
it
oryofIndiaorunderthecont
roloft
he
GovernmentofIndia.
”
I
notherwords,f
ort
hepur
posesofPar
tII
Ioft
heconst
it
uti
on,t
hest
atecompr
isesoft
he
f
oll
owing:
1.Gov
ernmentandPar
li
amentofI
ndi
ai.
etheExecut
iveandLegi
slat
ureoft
heUni
on
2.GovernmentandLegi
slat
ureofeachSt
atei
.et
heExecut
iveandLegi
slat
ureoft
he
var
iousStat
esofI
ndia
3.Al
ll
ocal
orot
heraut
hor
it
ieswi
thi
nthet
err
it
oryofI
ndi
a
4.Al
ll
ocal
andot
heraut
hor
it
ieswhoar
eundert
hecont
rol
oft
heGov
ernmentofI
ndi
a

LocalAuthor
it
y:
Iti
sdefinedi
nsecti
on3(31)oftheGeneral
ClausesAct
.Accor
dingtoit
,al
lthel
ocal
self-
governi
ngbodiesar
elocalaut
hori
ti
es.Suchas� Panchayat
s,Dist
ri
ctBoar
ds,Muni
cipal
it
ies,
etc.

OtherAuthor
it
ies:
I
tisady namicter
m,l
et�si
nter
preti
twi
tht
hehel
pofcasel
aws:
1.Ar
eUni
ver
sit
iesconsi
der
edast
heSt
ate?
i
. Uni
v ersi
tyofMadrasV.ShanthabaiAI
R1954Mad. 67:
Int
hi scase,i
twasaskedthattheUniv
ersityofMadrasisaStateornotasit
wasmadeundert heMadrasUniver
sit
yAct .Judgessai
dthattheter
m Other
Authorit
yusedinArti
cle12shouldbeEjusdem Generi
s(whichmeansoft he
sameki nd)wit
htheGov er
nmentorLegislatur
e.

Theyderiv
et hecolourofotherauthor
it
yf rom t
heprecedi
ngt hr
eeauthori
ti
es
underArti
cle12.So,theysaidthatUni
versiti
esarenotStatebecausetheyare
notofGov ernmentalorSoverei
gnnature.Accordi
ngtothiscase,the
Soverei
gnf unct
ionisaninherentqual
it
yf orbecomingState.

i
i
. Uj
j
ambai
V.St
ateofU.
P.AI
R1962SC1621:
 I
nthiscase,
SCcancelledtheapproachofEj usdem Generi
sforbecomingthe
St
ate,t
heysaidthatt
hisapproachisveryrestri
cti
veandinArti
cle12ther
eis
nocommongener isi
nt heabovethreecategori
es.So,theapproachof
Ej
usdem Generi
swasr estr
ict
edfrom thi
scase.

i
i
i. RajasthanElectri
cityBoardV.Mohanl alAIR1967SC1857:
I
nt hi
scase, SCt houghttof ormulat
enewcr it
eri
af orthecategoryofOther
Authority
.Theysai difanybodyoraut hori
tyiscreatedbyanyLawor
Constituti
ontheni tisobviousthatt
hatbodyhasmanypower stoaf
fect
Fundament alRights.So,ifthebodyhassomanypower stheni tmustbe
quali
fiedasanOt herAuthorit
y.Theyalsosaidthatthisty
peofbodydoesn' t
needt operform Gov er
nmentorSov er
eignfunct
ions.So,itisnotnecessar
yto
i
nher i
tthisfuncti
on( meanst hesebodiescanhav eanynat ure).

So,
Uni
ver
sit
iesar
eal
soSt
ateundert
heOt
herAut
hor
it
iescat
egor
y.
2.Bodi
esthataremadeunderspeci
alst
atut
eoractbutconst
it
utedf
orCommer
cial
pur
poseisalsoSt
ate?
SukhdevV.Bhagatr
am AI
R1975SC1331:-Inthi
scase,SCsai
dthatst
atutor
ybodi
essuch
asONGC/LI C/IFCwhi
chweresetupunderspeci
alst
atut
eareconsi
deredasStat
ei.
e.
OtherAut
horit
y.

3.Ai
rpor
tsar
econsi
der
edasSt
ateornot
?
R.D.Shet
tyV.Internati
onal
Air
portAuthor i
tyAIR1979SC1628: -I
nt hi
scase,Inter
national
Airpor
tAuthori
tyinvi
tedsomanyt ender
s, R.D.Shett
ywasalsoappliedforoneoft hese
tender
sbutduet osomedi scr
iminator
yr easonshistenderwasnotacceptedt henhef i
leda
casefort
hei nf
ringementofFundament alRightsagai
nstInt
ernat
ionalAir
portAuthority
.

Thenthequestionar i
sesthatt heInternationalAir
portAuthori
tyi
saSt ateornot?Inthiscase,
thecourtobservedt hatInternati
onal AirportAuthori
tywasf or
mul at
edunderAirport
Authori
ti
esActwhi chisapar l
iamentaryactt histheyalsoobservedthatCentr
alGov er
nment
hassomanypower st hattheyar eexercisingont hi
sbodyi .
e.Int
ernati
onalAir
portAuthori
ty.
TheCent r
alGover nmentwasempower edt oappointtheChair
manandot hermember sof
theInt
ernati
onal AirportAuthor i
ty.

Withthat,t
heentirecapital
amountthati
srequir
edt oestabl
ishanInternat
ional Ai
rpor
t
Authori
tywasinv estedbytheCent
ralGovernment.TheCentralGovernmenthadal sot he
powertot r
ansferthemanagementofv ari
ousAirport
s.Sobyl ooki
ngandconsi der
ingall
thesepointsSCsai dthatAir
por
tAuthori
tyi
saSt ateunderthecategoryofOt herAuthori
ty.

Int
hiscase,t
herewasnotanywei ghtagegiventot
hef unct
ionalaspectoftheAirport
Author
it
yinplaceofthattheygiveweightagetotheinstr
umentalaspect.SCsaidt hatifon
anypri
vatebodyalso,t
hegov ernmenthav eausualdegreeofcontrolonitsmanagementor
i
fthatbodyhasextraor
dinaryfi
nancialassist
ancefr
om thegov er
nmentt henthatprivate
bodyisal
soconsideredasI nst
rumentorAgencyoft heStateunderOt herAut
horityu/a12.

4.Bhar
atPet
rol
eum t
hati
sincor
por
atedundert
heCompani
esActi
sal
soaSt
ateornot
?
i
. Som Pr
akashV.Uni
onofI
ndi
a(1981)SSC449;
AIR1981SC212:
-Int
hiscase,
 alsoonthebasi
sofaninstr
umentalaspectofBhar
atPet
roleum whichis
i
ncorpor
atedundertheCompaniesActwasalsoconsi
deredasaSt ateunder
thecat
egoryofOtherAut
hori
ty.

Thi
scaseisimport
antbecausethi
scasegiv
esus5cri
ter
iat
odet
ermi
ne
whetherabodyoraut
hori
tyisst
ateornot
.i.
e.f
oll
owi
ng:

i
. Fi
nanci
alResour
cesoft
heSt
atebei
ngt
heChi
efFundi
ngSour
ce
i
i
. Funct
ional
Char
act
eri
sbei
ngGov
ernment
al.
i
i
i. Absol
ute/
Plenar
yCont
rol
Resi
dingi
nGov
ernment
.
i
v. Pri
orhi
stor
yofthesameacti
vi
tybei
ngcar
ri
edoutbyt
heGov
ernment
andmadeov ert
othenewbody.
v
. Someel
ementofAut
hor
it
yorCommand.

i
i
. AjayHasiaV.Khali
dMuj ib(1981)1SCC;AIR1981SC487� I nt
hiscase,
Sc
saidthatdet
ermini
ngt esti
snotthatwhetherabodymadeorfor
mulateunder
astatuteornotbutdetermini
ngtestist
hatwhetherabodyi
sact
ingasan
i
nstrumental
ityoragencyoftheState.

Thi
scasegivesusaDeter
miningTestthatt
ell
sabout6cr
it
eri
atodet
ermi
ne
whethert
hebodyisSt
ateornot?So,t
histesti
sfol
lowi
ng:

i
. Whet
hert
heent
ir
eShar
eCapi
tal
ishel
dbyt
heGov
ernmentornot
i
i
. Fi
nanci
alAssi
stance(Agr
eatdegr
eeofFi
nanci
alAssi
stancei
sby
Gover
nment),
i
i
i. Monopol
ySt
atus(pr
otect
edbyt
heSt
ate)
,
i
v. DeepandPer
vasi
vecont
rol
ofSt
ate
v
. I
fthefunct
ionsareofpubli
cimpor
tanceorr
elat
edt
ogov
ernment
al
f
uncti
onsoft heCor
porat
ion,
v
i. IfadepartmentoftheGovernmentist
ransf
err
edtothatbodyor
corpor
ati
on.
Ifanybodyorcorporat
ionpassesthi
stestt
heniti
saSt at
eunder
OtherAuthori
tyu/a12.

i
i
i. Unai
dedPriv
ateSchoolsoverwhicht
heGover
nmenthasnoAdminist
rat
ive
Cont
rolar
enot�St ate� wit
hinthemeani
ngofAr
ti
cle12;
Sal
imblaSharmav.
St
.Paul
�sSeni orSecondarySchool
,AI
R2011SC2226.
So,
thi
ngst
hatar
enecessar
yforabodyt
obecomeSt
atear
e:
 Est
abl
i
shedunderanyLaworConst
it
uti
on
 Fi
nanci
all
yai
dedbyt
heGov
ernment
.
 Admi
nist
rat
iveCont
rol
oft
heGov
ernment
.
  Usual
degr
eeofCont
rol
oft
heGov
ernment
.

Whet
herSt
atei
ncl
udesJudi
ciar
y?
Arti
cle12oft heConst i
tuti
ondoesnotspeci f
icall
ydefi
ne‘ j
udici
ary’
.Thisgi vesthejudi
cial
authorit
iest hepowert opronouncedeci sionswhi chmaybecont r
aveningt othe
Fundament al Rightsofani ndivi
dual.I
fitwast akenint
ot heheadof‘ State’
,thenaspert he
arti
cle,i
twoul dbebyt heobl i
gationthatthefundament alr
ightsoftheci ti
zensshouldnotbe
vi
olated.Accor dingly,
thejudgement spronouncedbyt hecour tscannotbechal l
engedont he
groundt hatt heyv iol
atefundament alri
ghtsofaper son.Ont heotherhand, ithasbeen
obser v
edt hator derspassedbyt hecour t
sintheiradministr
ativecapacity(incl
udingbyt he
SupremeCour t)hav eregul
ar l
ybeenchal l
engedasbei ngv i
olati
veoff undament alri
ght
s.
Theanswert othi
squesti
onli
esinthedist
incti
onbetweent hejudici
alandnon-j
udi
cial
funct
ionsofthecour
ts.Whenthecourtsperfor
mt hei
rnon-judicialf
unct
ions,
theyf
allwit
hin
thedefini
ti
onofthe‘
Stat
e’.Whenthecourtsperfor
mt hei
rjudicialf
uncti
ons,t
heywouldnot
fal
lwithint
hescopeofthe‘St
ate’
.
So,itcanbenot edt
hatthejudi
cialdecisionofacour tcannotbechall
engedasbeing
viol
ativ
eoff undament
alri
ghts.But,anadmi ni
str
ati
vedecisionorarul
emadebyt he
j
udiciarycanbechall
engedasbei ngv i
olati
veoffundament alri
ght
s,i
fthatbesupport
edby
fact
s.Thisisbecauseofthedisti
nctionbet weenthejudici
alandnon-j
udici
alf
uncti
onsoft
he
courts.
InthecaseofNar eshShridharMi raj
karv .St
ateofMahar asht
ra,AI
R1967SC1, a9-judge
benchoft heSupremeCour thel dthatajudici
aldeci
sionpronouncedbyajudgeof
compet entjuri
sdi
cti
oninorinr elati
ontoamat t
erbroughtbefor
ehimforadjudicati
on
cannotaf f
ectthefundament alri
ghtsoft heci
ti
zenssincewhatthejudi
cialdecisi
onpur por
ts
todoi stodecidethecontroversybet weentheparti
esbroughtbeforet
hecour tandnothing
mor e.Therefor
e,suchajudicialdecisi
oncannotbechal l
engedunderArti
cle12.

1.
2‘Law’
underar
ti
cle13
Ar
ti
cle13
13.Lawsi
nconsi
stentwi
thori
nder
ogat
ionoft
hef
undament
alr
ight
s:
1.Alll
awsinfor
ceintheter
ri
toryofIndiaimmediat
elybefor
ethe
commencementoft hi
sConst i
tut
ion,i
nsofarastheyareinconsi
stentwi
th
theprov
isi
onsofthi
sPart,shal
l,t
ot heext
entofsuchinconsi
stency,bev
oid.

2.TheStateshallnotmakeanylawwhicht
akesawayorabr
idgestheri
ght
s
confer
redbyt hi
sPartandanylawmadeincont
rav
enti
onofthi
sclauseshal
l
,
totheextentofthecontr
avent
ion,
bevoi
d.

3.I
nt hisart
icl
e,unl
essthecontextother
wi serequi
reslawincludesany
Ordinance,or
der,by
elaw,rul
e,regulat
ion,noti
fi
cati
on,custom orusages
 havingi
nthet er
ri
toryofIndiathefor
ceofl aw;
lawsinfor
ceincl
udeslaws
passedormadebyLegi slat
ureorothercompet entaut
hori
tyint
heterri
tor
yof
I
ndiabeforethecommencementoft hi
sConst it
uti
onandnotprevi
ously
repeal
ed,notwit
hstandingthatanysuchl aworanypartther
eofmaynotbe
theninoperati
oneitheratallori
npar t
icularar
eas

4.Nothi
nginthi
sart
icl
eshal
lappl
ytoanyamendmentoft
hisConst
it
uti
onmade
underAr
ti
cle368.

Arti
cle13ai
dsthecourtandci
ti
zenst
okeept hepowersofthel
egi
slat
ureunder
previ
ew.Art
icl
e13oftheIndi
anConst
itut
iondescr
ibesthemeansf
orjudici
al
revi
ew.
Itenj
oi nsadut yont heIndi
anSt atet or
espectandi mpl ementt hef undament al
right
.Andatt hesamet i
me,itconf ersapoweront hecour t
st odecl arealawor
anactv oidifitinfr
ingest hefundament alr
ights.Thej udici
arypl aysav ery
i
mpor tantr oleasapr otect
oroft heconstit
utionalrights.Thepr i
mar y
responsi bi
li
tyf orimpl ementati
onoft herul
eofl awl iesthatt hejudiciary.I
tisthe
signi
ficanceofj udicialrevi
ew,toensur ethatdemocr acyi sinclusiveandt hereis
account abil
ityofev eryonewhowi eldsorExercisespubl i
cpower .

Theprinci
pleofjudi
cial
reviewbecomesanessent i
alf
eat
ureofIndi
an
consti
tuti
on.Thepowerofj udi
cialrev
iewisincor
porat
edinar
ticl
e226and227of
theConstit
uti
onasthehi ghcourtsareconcernedandinr
egardtoSupremeCour
t
art
icl
e32and136oft heConstit
ution.

Judicial
revi
ewisthepowerofgotopronounceupontheconst
itut
ional
i
tyof
l
egislati
veactswhi
chfal
lwit
hint
heirnormalj
uri
sdi
cti
ontoenforceandthe
powert oref
usetoenfor
cesuchastheyfindt
obeunconsti
tuti
onalandhence
voi
d.

Thereisasayi
ngthatpowercorr
uptsamanandabsolut
epowercorr
upts
absolut
ely
.Ther
efor
eanyactoft heor
dinar
ylawmaki
ngbodi
eswhichcount
ry
winstheprov
isi
onsofthesupremelawmustbev oi
d.
Backgroundofjudicialrev
iew
Thedoct r
ineofjudi
cialrevi
ewwasf ort hefi
rstti
mepr opoundedbytheSupreme
CourtofAmer i
ca.Or i
ginal
lytherewasnoexpr essprovisi
onforjudi
cial
revi
ew
underConstit
utionofAmer i
ca.Fort
hef ir
stti
mei n1803t heSupremeCourtin
Will
iam MarburyversusJamesMadi sonconf i
rmsthelegalpri
ncipl
eofjudi
cial
rev
iew,theabil
ityofthesupr emeCour ttoli
mitcongressi
onalpowerbydeclari
ng
l
egislat
ionunconstit
uti
onal .

Theactsofcongressi
nconfl
i
ctwit
htheConst
itut
ionornotlawandtheref
orenot
bi
ndingtothequotesandt
hatthej
udi
ciar
yisr
esponsibl
ealwaystoupholdthe
Consti
tut
ion.
Ar t
icl
e13i st
heguardi
anofRi
ghtsmentionedinPartII
IofourConst
it
uti
on.Cl
ause
(1)oft hesai
dArt
icl
eemphasisest
hatalli
nconsi
stentexi
sti
nglawsbecomevoid
from thecommencementoftheConsti
tuti
on.
Arti
cle13(1)wasfir
stinter
pretedbyt heSupr
emeCour
tinadj
udicat
ingwhet
her
Arti
cle13hadanyretrospecti
veef fectasf
arasl
awsi
nconsi
stentwi
ththe
fundamentalr
ight
swer econcer ned.
InKeshav anMadhavaMenonvTheSt ateOfBombay( 1951),aseven-
judgeBench
hear
dt heappeal ofapeti
ti
onerprosecut edundert heIndianPress(Emergency
Powers)Act .Par
toftheappealposedi fAr t
icle13( 1)oftheIndi
anConst i
tut
ion
coul
d‘decl ar
ealll
awsinconsi
stentwitht hef undament al
rightst
obev oidasifthey
hadnev erbeenpassedandexisted’orv oidabi ni
ti
o.
TheCourtorderedthatArti
cle13(1)doesnotmakeexi sti
nglawsinconsi
stentwit
h
thef
undament alri
ghts,orvoidabini
tio,f
orallpurposes.ButArt
icl
e13makessuch
l
aws’inef
fectualandv oi
d’prospect
ivelybasedoni t
sexerciseoffundamentalr
ight
s
onandafterthecommencementoft heConstitut
ion.
Just
iceDas,onbehalfoft
hebench( bar
ri
ngthedissentJust
iceFazlAli
),obser
ved,
Ther
efore,i
falawbecomesv oidfr
om theappli
cabi
li
tyoftheConsti
tut
ion,asiti
s
i
nconsist
entwitht
her i
ght
simbibedinpartII
I,
itwil
lst
il
lappl
ytociti
zensandnon-
ci
ti
zenswhocommi t
tedanoffenceunderthesaidl
aw.
DoNon-
Cit
izenshav
eAccesst
oAr
ti
cle13(
2)?
Arti
cle13(2)oftheIndi
anConsti
tut
ionsaysthattheSt at
emustnotmakel awst hat
arenotin‘consonance’wi
ththeConsti
tut
ion.Andi ft
helawdraft
edinter
v enedwi th
anindivi
dual’
sfundamentalr
ight
s,t
hesaidlawwi llbecomevoidtotheext entofthe
contr
avention.Thi
sisanexpressgroundforjudi
cialrevi
ewaf
terlegi
slat
ion.
TheSt at
eOfGujaratAndAnotherv .Shr i
AmbicaMill
sLt d.i
soneoft hemanycases
thataddtotheconundrum ofint
erpr et
ingAr
ti
cle13(2).Forsomecont ext,
in1961,
theStateofGuj
arathadenactedtheBombayWel fareFund( Guj
aratExtensi
onand
AmendmentAct )fol
lowingthebif
ur cati
onoftheStateofBombayi nMay1960.
TheAmendmentActmadesev er alchangesintheBombayWel f
areFundAct1953.
Therespondent ,
acompanyr egisteredundertheCompaniesAct( 1956)
,rai
sed
‘
severalcontenti
ons’.Oneoft
hem posedt hatspeci
fi
cprovi
sionsoftheAmendment
Act‘
violatedthefundamentalr
ightofci t
izenemployer
sandempl oyeesunderArt
icl
e
19(1)(f
)’.Hence,theActwasnotaut hor
isedunderl
awandv oidunderArti
cle13(
2).
Amongotherthings,
theConsti
tuti
onalBenchoft
heSupr
emeCourtal
sohadto
answeri
f‘AmbikaMill
’,
anon-ci
tizen,
couldcl
aimthel
awtobev
oidornon-
estbased
onAr
ti
cle13(
2).
Onbehal
foft heConst
it
uti
onal BenchoftheSupremeCour t
,Just
iceMathew
obser
vedthatwitht
headv entoftheConsti
tut
ionofIndi
a,speci
alri
ghtsweregiv
en
onl
ytocit
izens,whi
chrenderthem prot
ecti
onagainstapostunconsti
tut
ional
law.
Butthesepr ov i
si
ons, al
thoughunconst i
tutional
fort
hecit
izen,werenotnon-
estfor
non-cit
izensliketheempl oyerinthi
scase.TheCourtal
soobser vedwit
hrespectto
Art
icle13(1),asi nter
pretedbyt heKeshav anMadhavacase,theword‘voi
d’woul
d
notappl yfornon- ci
ti
zenf rom pre-
const
itutionl
aws.
DoPer
sonal
LawsFal
lundert
heAmbi
tofAr
ti
cle13(
3)?
Arti
cle13(3)(
a)i
ncludesanylawi ncl
udingor
dinance,or
der,bye-
laws,r
ule,
regul
ati
ons,noti
fi
cati
on, cust
om orusagehav i
ngintheterr
it
oryofIndi
at hefor
ceof
l
aw.I nanutshel
l,
theCl auseisnotexhaust
iveandshallcontai
nallt
hosel awsthat
viol
atefundamentalri
ghts.
Art
icle13(3)(b)incl
udeslawspassedormadebythelegisl
atur
eorothercompetent
authori
tyinthet err
it
oryofIndi
abef
orethecommencementoft hi
sConstit
uti
onand
notpreviousl
yr epealed.Itmeanst
hesamet hi
ngas‘
existi
nglaw’def
inedinArt
icl
e
372oft heIndianConst i
tuti
on.
Compr ehensivel
yandwi thacombi nedreadingofbot hCl
auses(2)and(3)(a)of
Arti
cle13,Clause(2)statesthattheSt ateshall
notmakeanyl awt hatvi
olat
esthe
fundamental r
ightoftheindi
vidual.Clause(3)(a)statesl
awincludescustom and
usage.Theissuei scustom andusagei naterri
tor
ycannotbemadebyt he
l
egislat
urethereof.Thenhowi sitincludedintheinclusi
vedefi
niti
onoflaw?
Buthereiswheret
hel
anguageoft
hestatut
esisint
erpr
eteddi
ff
erent
ly.Andev
ent
he
i
nter
pretati
on,
insomeways,r
emai
nsinconsist
ent.
I
nStateofBombayv .NarasuAppaMali(1951)
,theBombayHi ghCourthadto
deci
dethevali
dit
yoftheBombayPr ev
entionofHinduBigamousMarri
agesAct1946.
TheCourtansweredwhetherper
sonall
awscouldbei nt
erpr
etedas‘l
awsinforce’
as
menti
onedunderArti
cle13(3)
(a)
.
Hon’ble.Just
iceM.C.Chaglafel
tthatArti
cle13( 3)(
a)usest heexpr
ession‘ l
aw’ and
not‘personall
aw’.Thei
ssuewaswhet herpersonall
awshoul dbeincludedi nArticle
13(3)( a)orArt
icl
e13(3)(b).Theformerincl
udesst at
utorylaw,andthel att
erisf ar
wider,incl
udi
ngalllawenf
orcedafter1950.TheCour theld:TheCourt
,inthiscase,
opi
nedt
hatper
sonal
lawscoul
dnotbepar
toft
hei
ncl
usi
vedef
ini
ti
onof‘
l
aw’
underAr
ti
cle
13.

However
, i
nAhmedabadWomen’ sActi
onGroupv.UnionofIndi
a(1997),the
Supr
emeCour thel
dthati
frel
i
giousper
sonall
awsareapar tofthecodif
iedlawsby
thel
egi
slatur
e,t
henthecodi
fi
cati
onmustbefort
hef undamentalri
ghts.
Thequandar
ythatbeginsfr
om Nar asuj udgementconti
nuest
oloom i
ntheTripl
e
Tal
aqjudgementandev enaft
erthat—f urt
herconfusi
ngtheambi
tanddefi
nit
ionof
l
awand‘ l
awinfor
ce’inArti
cle13(3)(a)and( b)
.
In2017,inShayaraBanov.UnionofIndiaAndOr s.(al
socalledTr i
pleTalaq
j
udgement )theHon’bl
eSupremeCour thadanoppor t
uni
tyt oobservet hei
ncl
usi
on
ofpersonallawsinArt
icl
e13.ButtheCour tbel
ievedthatsinceShar i
atlawisa
stat
utorylawcodifi
edbythecentr
allegi
slati
veassembl y
,ther i
ghtswithMusli
m men
topronouncet r
ipl
etal
aqandgetdivorcedisarbit
raryandunr easonable.
Just
iceFaliNar i
manandJ.Lal i
twer eoftheopinionthatt
he1937Actf el
lunderthe
expr
ession‘lawinf orce’underArt
icl
e13( 3)(
b).Andtheref
ore,t
heTr i
pleTalaqlaw
waspr onouncedi nconsist
entwit
ht heIndianConstit
uti
on.Justi
ceNar i
manal so
doubtedtheinterpretati
onofNarusuJudgementt hatdrewadiffer
encebet weenthe
twokindsofl aws.
I
n2018, I
ndianYoungLawy ersAssoci
ati
onv.TheStateOfKerala,al
socall
edt he
Sabari
malaCase, deal
twiththesamequest i
on.TheCourt
,inthiscase,sai
dt hatt
he
‘
indi
vi
dual’i
satthehear toftheIndi
anConsti
tuti
on,andasfarasanyl awaffected
thei
ndivi
dual,
itcouldfall
underAr t
icl
e13(3)
.TheCourtobserved:
TheCourthadsaidthatprohi
bit
ingwomenof10-50y ear
sofageintheSabar
imal
a
Templeunderacustom isnotreasonabl
eor‘
uni
versal’
.Andal
lval
idcust
omsmust
be‘r
easonabl
e,cert
ainandcontinous’
.
Looki
ngAtAr
ti
cle13Vi
s-À-
VisTheBasi
cSt
ruct
ureDoct
ri
ne
Ononeside,Arti
cle13(2)oft
heIndianConsti
tuti
onsaysthattheParl
i
amentcannot
makealawt hattakesawayorabridgesf
undament al
right
s.Ont heot
her
,Art
icl
e368
gi
vestheParli
amentt hepowert
oamendt hefundamentalr
ightsbyaspeci
al
major
it
yinthePar l
iament.
InI.C.Golaknath&OrsvstheStat
eOfPunjab,
theCour
tdeal
twit
hwhet her
exerci
singpowerunderArt
icl
e368cannull
ifyt
heeff
ect
sofArti
cle13oftheIndi
an
Constit
uti
on; andwhet
herParl
i
amenthadthepowertoamendPartII
Iofthe
Constit
uti
on.
Ini
tsorder
,themajori
tyBenchofsi
xtosevenhel
dthatev
eryconsti
tut
ional
amendmentalsopartakesthesamefeat
uresasanormalst
atut
e.Theref
ore,i
tis
cover
edunderArt
icle13(3)(a).
Onceitiscover
ed,
theli
mit
ati
onofAr
ti
cle13(2)comesintothepict
ure,
whichstates
that‘
theStat
eshal
lnotmakeanyl
awwhi cht
akesawayorabr i
dgestheri
ghts’
.Then
nosuchamendmentcouldbemadethatabri
dgesanypartoftheConsti
tut
ion.
Alt
houghtheCour ti
nt heGolaknathcasehel
dthattheParl
iamenthadnopowerto
amendPar tI
IIoft
heIndi anConsti
tuti
on,t
heParl
iamentrespondedbyenacti
ngt
he
Twenty-
fourt
hConstituti
onal Amendment.Usi
ngwhi cht
hePar l
i
amentinser
teda
newClausetoAr t
icl
e13; Ar
ti
cle13(4)
.
Ar
ti
cle13(
4)r
ead:
“Nothingi
nthisart
icl
eshal
lappl
ytoanyamendmentoft
hisConst
it
uti
onmadeunder
Art
icle368RightofEqual
it
y”
TheVal
i
dit
yoft
heTwent
y-Four
thAmendmentwasf
urt
herchal
l
enged
i
nKesav
anandaBhar
ati
v.Stat
eOfKer al
aAndAnr(
1973)
.Inwhi
chamaj
ori
tyBench
of7t
o6overr
uledt
heGolakNathcase.
TheHon’
bleCourthel
dthatthepowertoamendwaspr
iort
otheTwent
y-Four
th
Amendment(Art
icl
e368).I
tfurt
herobser
ved:
“TheAmendmentj
ustmadeitexpl
ici
tanddecl
arat
ory.Theter
m“ Amendment”per
sepost
ulat
est
hattheor
igi
nalConsti
tut
ionmustsurv
ivewit
hitsbasi
cfeat
ures”
.
Hence,t
hebasi cfeat
ureswereenumeratedbyJ.Si
khr
i,whi
ch,however
,wasnot
exhaust
ive.TheseBasicFeat
ures,i
ftouchedupon,
wil
ldecl
arethel
awortheActto
bevoidandaccordingl
yunconsti
tut
ional.
Themeani ngofAr ti
cle13mayappeart obesimpleatf i
rstglance, butovert
heyears,
i
tspurposeanddef ini
ti
onhaveundergoneseverali
nterpretat
ions.Ar t
icl
e13andits
ambithavedev el
opedwi t
heverycasethatdi
scusseditsimpl i
cationsonbothpre-
andpost-coloni
allaws.Ithasbeenv i
talf
orourConstit
utionasi tsuccessful
l
ymade
sever
alrepressiv
el awsv oi
d,andinsomecases, i
noperativ
e.
Furt
her
,iti
sessent
ial
torememberthatthel
egisl
atur
ecannotencr
oachuponjudi
cial
rev
iewunderArt
icl
e368.I
tisani
nherentandimpli
edlimi
tat
iononthel
egi
slat
ure’
s
powerofconst
it
uti
onalamendment
Thispi
ecehasal soi
mplici
tl
yappl
i
edt heimpor t
anceofjudici
alrev
iew,r
esponsibl
e
forcl
earl
yreadingAr
ticl
e13toshiel
df undamentalri
ghts.Alt
houghthecaselaws
i
nterpr
eti
ngAr t
icl
e13hasbeeninconsistent
,itdoesanswersomei mportant
questi
ons.

Doct
ri
neofsev
erabi
l
ity
Iti
sal soknownasdoct rineofsepar abil
it
y.Itprot
ectsourFundament alRight
s, asit
i
sment i
onedi nthecl ause1)oft heAr ticl
e13oft heConst it
utiont hatAlllaws
enforcei nIndia,beforet hecommencementofConst it
ution,i
nsof arast heyare
i
nconsi stentwi t
ht hepr ov i
sionsoff undament alr
ight
sshal l
tot heext entofthat
i
nconsi stencybev oid.Butt hewhol el aworactwoul dnotbehel dinvali
d,butonl ythe
provi
si onsoft helaworactwhi char enoti nconsist
encywi t
ht heFundament al r
ights.
Thisiswhatt heDoct r
ineofsev erabili
tyis.Butiti
sonlypossi bleifthepar twhichis
i
nconsi stentwi t
ht helawi sseparat edfrom thewhol elaw.Ifbot hthev ali
dand
i
nv al
i
dpar taresocl osel ymi xupwi theachot herthati
tcannotbesepar atedthent he
wholel aworactwi l
lbehel di nv
alid.

I
nA.
K.Gopal
anv
.St
ateofMadr
as
TheSupr emecour theldthatincaseofrepugnancyt otheConst i
tuti
on,onlythe
repugnantprovi
sionoft heimpugnedActwi l
lbev oidandnott hewhol eofit,and
everyatt
emptshoul dbemadet osaveasmuchaspossi bleoftheact .I
fthe
omissionoftheinv ali
dpartwill
notchangethenat ureorthestructureoftheobject
ofthelegisl
atur
e,itisseverabl
e.ItwasheldthatexceptSection14al lothersecti
ons
oft
hePrevent
iveDetenti
onAct,
1950wer eval
i
d,andsi
nceSection14couldbe
sev
eredfr
om therestoftheAct
,thedet
enti
onofthepet
it
ionerwasnotil
l
egal.
Doct
ri
neofEcl
i
pse
Ecli
pseoccur swhenoneobj ectovershadowstheother,
soast henamesuggests
thatDoctri
neofEcl i
pseisappli
edwhenanyl aworactvi
olatesthef
undamental
ri
ghtsthent hefundamentalri
ghtsovershadowstheotherlaworactandmakeit
unenforceablebutnotvoidabini
tio.Theycanbeenforcedagainift
herest
ri
cti
ons
posedbyt hef undamentalr
ight
sar eremoved.

Thef
oll
owi
ngcasemakesi
tcl
ear
-
I
nBhi
kaj
iNar
ainDhakr
asv
.St
ateofMadhy
aPr
adesh
Section43oft heMot orVehicl
esAct ,1939wasamendedbyt heCentralProv inces
andBer arMot orVehicles(Amendment )Act, 1947,bothwer epre-consti
tut ion
l
egislati
ons.TheAmendmentActempower edt heProvincialGovernmentt ot akeup
theent i
reProvincialMotorTransportBusiness, t
hesearev iol
ati
veofar t
icle19( 1)(g)
.
ByaConst i
tuti
onal amendmentofAr ti
cle19( 1)(6)theSt atewasempower edt o
carryont hebusinesst othenotif
icati
onissuedbyGov ernmentt othi
sef fectwas
quest i
oned.TheSupr emeCour theldthatthet ruepositi
oni sthatt
heimpugnedl aw
became, forthet i
mebei ng,ecl
ipsedbyt hef undament alright
.Theef f
ectoft he
Const i
tuti
onAct ,1951wast oremov etheshadowandt omaket heimpugnedact
freefrom allbl
emi shorinfi
rmity.

Doct
ri
neofwai
ver
Anindi
v i
dual
exerci
sescertainri
ghtst
hatar
econfer
reduponhim eit
herbythe
Consti
tuti
on,
stat
uteoracont ract
.ARightcanbedefi
nedasaninterestoracl
aim
whichgivest
heindi
vidualthepowertocont
rolt
heactofother
s,i
.e.tomake
someonecommi toromi tanact.

Now,
thequest
ionar
iseswhencant
heser
ight
sbeexer
cisedorwai
vedof
f?
I
tisimpor t
anttounder standt heDoct
rineofwaiveratthi
sjuncture.Thedoct ri
neof
Waiverofrightsisbasedont hepremisethatapersonishisbestj udgeandt hathe
hasthelibert
ytowai vet heenjoymentofsuchri
ght sasareconferr edonhim bythe
Stat
e.Howev er
,thepersonmusthav etheknowledgeofhisrightsandt hatthe
waivershouldbev ol
unt ary.

Waivingar
ightmeansthataper
soncannolongercl
aimthatr
ightandi
simpededto
chal
lenget
heconsti
tut
ional
it
yofthatl
awf
orthebenefi
tofwhich,t
heri
ghti
swaived
off
.

Thedoct
ri
nei
sbasedont
hepr
inci
plet
hataper
soni
sthebestj
udgeofhi
sown
i
nterest
sandwhengi venfullknowl
edge,heshoulddeci
deforhimsel
f.I
nI ndia,
a
personhastheauthor
itytowaiveoffri
ghtsar
isi
ngoutofacont r
actorst
at utebut
cannotrel
i
nquishconsti
tuti
onalri
ghtsorri
ght
sguaranteedbytheconsti
tutionit
sel
f.

Ev
olut
ionoft
heDoct
ri
ne:
Shor
tl
ywhentheConst
it
uti
oncamei
ntof
orcet
hecour
tswer
emetwi
tht
hequest
ion
ofwai
verofr
ight
s.
1.Behr am KhurshedPesikakav.TheStat
eofBombay ,1954:
Itwasobser vedthatthefundamentalr
ightsarebasedonsuchpr i
nci
ples
whi chareembodi edinthepreambleoftheIndi
anConst i
tut
ion.Fundamental
rightsareamat terofpubli
cpoli
cyandthesamecannotbewai v
ed.The
doct ri
neofwai v
erhasnoappl i
cati
ononmat terst
hatareapar tof
const i
tut
ionalpoli
cy

2.BashesharNat hv .TheCommi ssionerofIncomeTaxDel hi&Rajasthan&

Another,1959:
Theleadi ngcaset i
ll
dat eontheDoct ri
neofWai veri
sBashesharNat hv .CIT
wherethemaj ori
tyexpressedi tsv i
ewagai nstthewai v
eroff undament al
ri
ghts.Itwasuphel dthatitwasnotopent oci t
izenstowai veanyoft he
fundament alri
ghts.Anyper sonaggr i
evedbyt heconsequenceoft heexer ci
se
ofanydi scri
minatorypower ,couldbehear dtocompl ainagai nstit.The
doctri
neofWai verdoesnotappl ytoIndianConst it
uti
on, asJusti
ceBhagwat i
stat
edt hat�.Our sisanascentdemocr acyandsi tuatedaswear e,social
ly,
economi call
y,educational
lyandpol i
ti
call
y,iti
st hesacr eddut yofthe
SupremeCour ttosafeguardt hef undament alri
ghtswhi chhav ebeenf orthe
fi
rstti
meenact edinPar tI
IIofourConst i
tuti
on�

3.OlgaTell
i
s&Or svsBombayMuni ci
palCorporat
ion:
I
nt hi
scase,itwasfurt
herhel
dthatther
ecanbenoest oppel agai
nstt
he
Consti
tut
ion.ThePreambleoftheConsti
tuti
onst at
esI
ndiatobea
democrati
crepubli
candnociti
zencouldbarterawaywithfundamentalr
ight
s.

Whatar
etheexcept
ionst
oFundament
alRi
ght
s?
Sav
ingofLawst
hatpr
ovi
def
orAcqui
sit
ionofEst
ates
UnderAr
ti
cle31Aoft heConsti
tut
ionofIndi
a,Fi
vecategor
iesofl
awshav ebeen
defi
nedf
rom beingchall
engedonthegroundsofviol
ati
onofFundamentalri
ght
s
grant
edbyArti
cl
e14and19oft heConstit
uti
on.Thesecat
egori
esarer
elatedto
 Acqui
si
ti
onofest
atesandt
her
ight
srel
atedt
oitbyt
heSt
ate.
 Anamal
gamat
ionofv
ari
ouscor
por
ati
ons.
  Modi
fi
cat
ionofmi
ningl
easesorev
enExt
ingui
shment
.
 Taki
ngov
ert
hemanagementofpr
oper
ti
esbyt
heSt
ate.
 Modi
fi
cat
ionoft
her
ight
soft
hedi
rect
orsofv
ari
ouscor
por
ati
ons.
Sav
ingofl
awst
hatgi
veef
fectt
osomeDi
rect
ivePr
inci
ples
UnderArt
icl
e31C(whichwasInsert
edbyt
he25t
hAmendmentActof1971)
,ar
e
cont
ainedtwopr
ovisi
ons,t
heseare:
 I
tstatest
hatifthereisalawwhichseekst oimplementthesoci
alisti
c
di
recti
vepri
ncipl
esdef i
nedunderArti
cle39(b)or39(c)t
henitshallnotbe
decl
aredvoi
dont hegroundsoft
hev i
olati
onoft hef
undamentalrights
defi
nedundertheAr t
icl
e14andAr t
icl
e19oft heConsti
tut
ionofIndia.
 And,i
fther
e’salawwhichcontai
nsadeclar
ati
onf
orgi
vingeff
ectt
osucha
pol
icyt
henitshall
notbecall
edinquest
ionint
heCour
toflaw.
Val
i
dat
ionofSomeAct
sandRegul
ati
ons
 UnderArti
cle31BoftheConst it
uti
onofIndia,t
heAct sandtheRegulati
ons
whichareincl
udedintheNi nt
hSchedulear eprotectedfrom bei
ngchall
enged
onthegroundsofv i
olat
ionofFundament alri
ght.Articl
e31Bi mmunisesany
l
awwhi chisincl
udedint heNinthSchedulefr
om al l
t heFundamentalr
ight
s
anditdoesnotmat t
erifanyoft hel
awsi ncl
udedi ntheNi nt
hSchedulefal
l
s
underanyofthefiv
ecat egori
eswhicharedef i
nedunderAr t
icl
e31A.

1.3Ri
ghtt
oEquali
ty(
Art
icl
e14-
18)
:Concept
s,Reasonabl
eCl
assi
fi
cat
ion
andnon-
Arbi
tr
ari
ness

ARTI
CLE14

Equal
it
yi sabasi cfeatureoftheConst it
uti
on.Theunder l
yingpur poseofAr ti
cle14is
totr
eatallpersonssimi lar
lycir
cumst ancedal i
ke,bothinpr i
vilegesconferr
edand
l
iabi
li
ti
esi mposed.Cl assif
icati
onmustnotbear bi
trar
ybutmustber ati
onal,thati
s
tosayitmustnotonl ybebasedonsomequal i
tiesorcharact eri
sti
cswhi charefound
i
nallpersonsgr oupedt ogetherandnoti notherswhoar el eftout ,
butthosequal i
ti
es
andcharacter
isticsmusthav ereasonablerelati
ontoobj ectofl egisl
ati
on.[
7]

Art
icl
e14r unasf ol
lows:
Art
icl
e14: Equali
tybefor
elaw:
TheStateshallnotdenytoanypersonequali
tybef
orethel
awort heequalpr
otect
ion
ofthelawswithintheter
ri
tor
yofIndiaProhi
bit
ionofdi
scri
minat
ionongroundsof
rel
i
gion,race,
caste,sexorpl
aceofbirt
h.[8]
Twoconceptsarei
nvol
vedi
nAr
ti
cle14,
viz,
'equal
i
tybef
orel
aw'
and'
equal
pr
otect
ionoflaws'
.

Equalit
ybef orel aw:
Iti
sofEngl ishor i
ginandi sanegat i
v econceptwhi chensuresthatt hereisnospeci al
pri
vil
ege'sinf av ourofanyone, thatal lareequall
ysubjecttotheor dinarylawoft he
l
andandt hatnoper son,whatev erbehi sr ankorcondit
ion,i
sabov et helaw.Thi sis
equivalentt
ot hesecondcor ollaryoft heDi ceanconceptoftheRul eofLawi nBr i
tai
n.
Thishowev er ,isnotanabsol uter ul
eandt herearenumberofexcept ionst oit,eg,
for
eigndi pl
omat senj oyimmuni t
yf rom thecount r
y'sj
udici
alprocess; Articl
e361
extendsi mmuni tytot hePresidentofI ndiaandt heStategovernors; publ
icof ficer
s
andjudgesal soenj oysomepr ot ecti
on, andsomespeci algroupsandi nterests,li
ke
thetradeuni ons, hav ebeenaccor dedspeci alpri
vi
legesbylaw.[9]

Equalprot
ecti
onoflaw:
Iti
stakenfrom AmericanConst it
uti
onandisaposi t
ivecont ent.Theguar
anteeof
equalprot
ecti
onoflawsi ssi mil
artooneembodiedint he14t hAmendmentt othe
Amer i
canConstit
uti
on.[10]Itdoesmotmeant hatidenticall
ythesamel awshould
applytoal
lpersons,orthatev er
ylawmusthaveauni ver salappli
cati
onwit
hinthe
countr
yirr
especti
veofdi ff
erencesofcir
cumstances.

Equal Protecti
onoft hel awsdoesnotpost ulatesequal treat
mentofal lpersons
wi thoutdistincti
on.Whati tpost ulat
esistheappl icati
onoft hesamel awsal i
keand
wi thoutdiscr i
minationt oall personssimil
arlysituated.I
tdenot esequal i
tyof
treatmenti nequal circumst ances.Itimpli
est hatamongequal st helawshoul dbe
equal andequal lyadmi nistered,thattheli
keshoul dbet reatedalikewi thout
dist i
nctionofr ace,religion, wealth,soci
alstatusorpol it
icalinf
luence.[11]Thus, t
he
rulei sthatthel i
keshoul dbet reatedali
keandnott hatunl i
keshoul dbet reated
alike.[12]

Except
ionstotheRuleofLaw
Theabov er
uleofequal
it
yishowev
er,
notanabsol
uter
uleandt
her
ear
enumberof
except
ionstoit
:[
13]
1.'
Equali
tybef
oret hel
aw'doesnotmeanthatthe"
powersofthepri
vatecit
izens
aresameast hepowersofthepubl
i
coffi
cial
s"�.Thus,apoli
ceoffi
cerhas
thepowertoarrestwhi
l
e,asageneral
rule,
nopri
vatepersonhasthi
spower
2.Therul
eoflawdoesnotpr
eventcert
aincl
assesofpersonsbeingsubj
ectto
speci
alr
ules.Thus,
membersofthearmedforcesar
econtrol
ledbymili
tar
y
l
aws.
3.Minist
ersandot herexecuti
vebodi
esaregi
venver
ywi
dediscr
eti
onar
ypowers
bythestatutes.AMinistermaybeall
owedbythel
aw'
toactashethi
nksf
it
'or
'
ifheissatisfi
ed'
.
4.Cer
tai
nmember
sofsoci
etyar
egov
ernedbyspeci
alr
ulesi
nthei
rpr
ofessi
on,
 i
.e.
,l
awy
ers,
doct
ors'
nur
ses,
member
sofar
medf
orcesandpol
i
ce.
Art
icl
e14permit
scl
assi
fi
cat
ionbutpr
ohi
bit
scl
assl
egi
slat
ion–REASONABLE
CLASSIFI
CATI
ON
Theequal protectionofl awsguar anteedbyAr t
icle14doesnotmeant hatal
llaws
mustbegener ali
nchar acter.Itdoesnotmeant hatt hesamel awsshoul dapplyto
allper
sons.Itdoesnotmeant hatev eryl
awmusthav euniver
salappli
cati
onfor ,
all
personsarenot ,bynat ure,attainmentorci rcumstancesi nthesameposi ti
on.The
varyi
ngneedsofdi f
ferentclassesofper sonsoftenr equir
eseparatetreat
ment .
[14]
From theverynat ureofsoci etyt hereshouldbedi fferentl
awsindiffer
entplacesand
theLegisl
aturecont r
olsthepol i
cyandenact sl
awsi nthebestint
erestofthesafety
andsecurityoftheSt ate.
[15]So, ar easonableclassifi
cati
onisnoton;ypermittedbut
i
snecessar yifsoci etyistopr ogress. [
16]

Thus,whatArti
cle14forbi
dsiscl
ass-legi
slati
onbutitdoesnotf orbidreasonabl
e
cl
assif
icat
ion.Theclassi
fi
cat
ion,
howev ermustnotbe" arbi
tr
ary
, arti
fi
cialor
evasi
ve"� butmustbebasedonsomer ealandsubstantial
dist
inctionbeari
ngajust
andreasonablerel
ati
ontotheobjectsoughttobeachi evedbythel egisl
atur
e.

TestofReasonabl
eCl
assi
fi
cat
ion[
18]

WhileArti
cle14f orbidsclasslegi
slat
ioni
tdoesnotf orbi
dreasonabl eclassif
icati
on
ofpersons,objects,andt r
ansacti
onsbythelegisl
atureforthepur poseofachi evi
ng
specif
icends.Butcl assi
ficat
ionmustnotbe" arbi
tr
ary,art
if
icialorev asi
ve"�.I t
mustalway srestuponsomer eal
uponsomer eal
andsubst antialdisti
ncti
onbear i
ng
ajustandreasonabl erelati
ont ot
heobjectsoughttobeachi evedbyt hel
egislati
on.

Cl
assi
fi
cat
iont
ober
easonabl
emustf
ulf
ilt
hef
oll
owi
ngt
wocondi
ti
ons:
1.Theclassi
fi
cati
onmustbef oundedont heint
ell
i
gibl
edif
fer
ent
iawhi
ch
di
sti
nguishespersonsorthi
ngthataregroupedtoget
herfr
om ot
her
slef
tout
oft
hegr oup–INTELLIGIBLEDIFFERENTIA
2.Thedif
fer
ent
iamusthav
earat
ional
rel
ati
ont
otheobj
ectsoughtt
obe
achi
evedbyt
heact.–RATI
ONALENEXUS
Thedi f
ferenti
awhi chisthebasisoft heclassi fi
cati
onandt heobj ectoftheactare
twodistinctthi
ngs.Whati snecessar yisthatt heremustbenexusbet weent hebasi
s
ofclassifi
cati
onandt heobjectoft heactwhi chmakest hecl assi
ficati
on.Itisonl
y
whent hereisnor easonablebasisf oraclassi f
icati
ont hatlegisl
ationmaki ngsuch
classi
fi
cationmaybedecl areddiscriminatory.Thus, t
hel egislat
uremayf i
xtheage
atwhichper sonsshallbedeemedcompet entt ocontractbet weent hemsel v
es,but
noonewi l
lclai
mt hatcompet ency.Nocont ractcanbemadet odependupont he
statur
eorcol ourofthehair.Suchacl assi
ficati
onwi llbear bit
rary.
Judi
cial
deci
siononr
easonabl
ecl
assi
fi
cat
ion
Asi
ngl
eindi
vi
dual
mayconst
it
uteacl
ass

I
nasi tuat
ionwher ethelawi smadeforasingl
eindiv
idualinthatcaset helawmade
wil
lbev al
idforthatsingleindi
vi
dual
.UnderArt
icl
e14l awsmadef orsinglepersoni
s
val
id.Peoplehaveabel ievethatl
awmadef orasingl
ei ndi
viduali
sdiscriminator
y,
butiti
snotlikethat,i
fthelaw, madei
srati
onalandhav ereasonablenexust henthe
l
awmadei sv al
i
d.
InChir
anj
iLal'
scasethecour
tjust i
fi
editsdeci
sionont hegr oundthatt
heclosur
eof
thecompanyhadaffect
edthepr oducti
onofanessent ialcommodi tyandcaused
seri
ousunemploymentamongstl abourer
s.Int
hepr esentcase, t
hedisput
ewas
betweenpri
vatepar
ti
esandnoi nterestofcommunitywasi nvolv
ed.
Speci alCourtsandSpeci alProcedur e
UnderAr t
icle246( 2)Parli
amentbyl awi sempower edtosetupSpeci alCourt
sandt o
speci alpr
ocedur ef orthetri
al ofcertain'of
fences'or'
classesoffences.Suchal aw
wil
l notbev i
olati
veofAr ticl
e14, ifitlaydownspr operguideli
nesforclassif
ying
'
offences' '
classesofof f
ences' or'classes'ofcasestobet ri
edbySpeci alCourt
.[29]
Butt hespeci alprocedurepr escribedbysuchal awshoul dnotbesubst anti
all
y
di
ffer entfrom thepr ocedurepr escribedunderanor di
narylaw.
Thefir
stleadi
ngcasei nthistopi
ci s:
Stat
eofWestBengal v.AnwarAli Sarkar
[30]
Speci
alCour t
swerei nt
roducedinWestBengal undersecti
on3oftheWestBengal
Speci
alCour t
sordinance,1949,(
Or di
nanceNo.3of1949)whi chwasr eplacedin
March,1950,bytheWestBengal SpecialCourt
sAct ,
1950,(WestBengalActXof
1950),f
orthespeediertri
alsofsomecaseswhi chwer etoberef
err
edtoSpeci al
Court
sbyt heStateGov er
nment .

Acase, t
heSpecialcourtt
ri
edunderanot i
fi
cat i
onundersect i
on5oft hesai
dAct,
andMr .AnwarAliand49ot her
sweretri
edf orvariousoffencesal
legedtobe
commi tt
edbythem inthecourseofrai
dingaf actory,knownasJessopFactory
,as
anarmedgang, andwer econvi
ctedandsent encedt ovaryi
ngter
msof
i
mprisonments.
TheSupremeCour theldthatSecti
on5( 1)oftheWestBengal Special
CourtsAct
cont
ravenedArt
icle14andwasv oidsinceitconferredarbitr
arypoweront he
Governmentt
ocl assi
fyoffencesorcasesati t
spl easureandt heActdidn'
tlaydown
anypoli
cyorgui
del i
nefortheexerciseofdiscreti
ont oclassi
fycasesoroffencesat
i
tspleasur
eandt heactdidn'tl
aydownanypol icyorguideli
nesfortheexerciseof
di
screti
ontocl
assifycasesorof f
ences.
Kathi
Ranningv .St
ateofSaurasht
ra[
31]
Thevali
dit
yofasi mil
arActwasupheldonthegroundthati
thadl
aiddownpr
oper
gui
deli
nesfortheexerciseofdi
scr
eti
onbytheexecuti
vetoref
ert
ocasestoSpeci
al
Court
sfortri
al.Theobjectasmenti
onedintheOrdi
nancewastoprov
idef
or"publ
i
c
safet
y,publ
icor
derandpr
eser
vat
ionofpeaceandt
ranqui
l
li
ty"
�int
heSt
ateof
Saurasht
ra.

I
tt husr efer r
edt ofourdi st
inctcategoriesof' offences' orcaseswhi chcoul dbe
dir
ect edbyt heGov ernmentt obet ri
edbyt heSpeci al Courtsestabli
shedunder
Ordinance.TheSupr emeCour theldthattheActwasnotv i
olativeofAr ticl
e14oft he
Const it
ut i
on.TheCour tsaidthemai ndi st
inct i
onbet weent heWestBengal caseand
theSaur ashtraOr dinancewast hatwhileinf ormert her ewasnopr inciplet obef ound
tocont rol theappl i
cat i
onofdi scri
minatorypr ovisionort ocor r
elatethesepr ovi
sions
tosomer easonabl e, t
angibleandr ati
onal objective;thelatterclearl
ylai ddownt he
guidingpr inciple,thatis,toprovideforpubl i
csaf ety
,mai ntenanceofpubl i
cor derand
preser v
at i
onofpeaceandt ranquil
lit
yinSt ate.Themer ement ionoft hespeedi ertri
al
ast heobj ecti ntheWestBengal Actdidnotcur et hedef ect,becauset heexpr ession
affordednohel pindet erminingwhatcasesr equiredspeedi ertrial
.Thust hemai n
objectt ot heWestBengal Actwast hatitpermi tteddiscriminationwi thoutr easonor
withoutanyr at
ional basis.
NewconceptofEqual
i
ty:
Prot
ect
ionagai
nstar
bit
rar
iness-NON
ARBI
TRARINESS

Unti
l1970wesawt hatwhetherthelawsat i
sfythetestofArti
cle14ornotofitdoes
notsat
isf
ytheniti
sirr
ati
onal.Butafter1971therighttoequali
tyunderAr
ti
cle14got
newdimensionanddif
ferentprospecti
ve.AnditallhappenedbecauseofJ.
Bhagwatii
nE.P.Raocase.

E.P.Royappav .StateofTami lNadu[ 33]

TheSupr emecour thasdr i
ftedf rom thetradi
tional conceptofequal it
ywhi chwas
basedonr easonabl eclassificati
onandhasl aiddownanewconceptofequal i
ty.
Bhagwati J.,deli
veringt hejudgementonbehal fofhi msel f,ChandrachudandKr ishna
Iy
er,JJ.propoundedt henewconceptofequal ityinthef oll
owingwor ds-"Equali
tyis
ady namicconceptwi thmanyaspect sanddimensi ons, anditcannotbe'cr i
bbed,
cabinedandconf ined' wit
hint radit
ionalanddoct r
inair
el i
mi t
s.From aposi ti
vi
sti
c
pointofview, equalityisantithesist oarbi
trar
iness.I nfact ,
equalit
yandar bitr
ari
ness
areswornenemi es; onebel ongst otheruleofl awi nar epublicwhiletheother,t
ot he
whim capriceofanobsol etemonar ch.Wher eanacti sar bi
trary
,iti
simpliciti
nitthat
i
tisunequal bothaccor di
ngt opol i
ticall
ogicandconst ituti
onallawandi stherefore
vi
olati
veofAr ti
cle14" .

ARTI
CLE15

Art
icl
e15pr ohi
bit
sthediscr
imi
nat
ionont
hebasisoffait
h,sex,cast
e,r
aceandplace
ofbir
th.Consti
tut
ionofI
ndiapr
ohi
bit
sanyqui
tedisabi
l
ity,
restr
ict
ionorcondi
ti
on
wi
thr
espectt
oaccessi
ngpubl
i
cpar
ks,
Shops,
Hot
elsandr
est
aur
ant
s.

Peoplewer
ebeat enupf ort
ouchingidolsofgodshasbecomeat y
picalaff
airof
newspaper
sheadl i
neswhenev erI'
m goingthr
oughone.I
tgav
et heimpressiontome
typeofani
ghtmar ewhichhascompel ledmet ol
ookint
otheprovi
sionseffect
ive
thatpr
ohi
bitsuchdiff
erenti
ati
on.
Ar
ti
cle15:
Int
erdi
cti
onofdi
scr
imi
nat
ion
 Art
icl
e15(
1):St
atepr
ohi
bitf
rom di
scr
imi
nat
inganyoft
heci
ti
zenbasi
soft
he
fol
l
owingcat
egori
es
 Caste:Di
scr
imi
nat
ioninthenameofnameofcast
eispr
ohi
bit
ed.Thi
sav
ert
s
thecri
mesagai
nstlessf
ortunat
e
 Race:
Per
son'
sor
igi
nshoul
dn'
tbeont
hebasi
sofdi
scr
imi
nat
ion.
 Rel
igi
on:Per
sonshoul
dn'tbedi
scr
imi
nat
edont
hebasi
sofr
eli
gioni
nor
dert
o
ent
eranypubli
cpl
aceetc�
 Pl
aceofBi
rt
h:Noper
sonpl
aceofbi
rt
hcan'
tbet
akeni
ntoconsi
der
ati
onand
di
scr
imi
nat
ethem.
 Sex:
Genderofanypar
ti
cul
ari
ndi
vi
dual
can'
tbeabasi
ssoast
odi
scr
imi
nat
e.
InthecaseDPJoshi v/sSt at
eofMadhy aBharat1,Onemedi cal col
legewhichwas
establi
shedinIndorewhi chwasundert hecontrolofMadhy aPr adeshGov ernment.
Thegov ernmentofstatehadmader ul
ewhichsay sthatallt
heAccommodat ing
studentsresi
dinginMadhy aBharatwouldn'
tber equi
redt opayanycapi t
ationfees,
butallthenon-domici
lest udent
shadt opayanomi nalfeeof1300- 1500Rsas
capit
ationfees.Thi
srulewaschal l
engedbyfil
ingawr itinSupremeCour tundert he
Arti
cle32claimingthatithadv i
olatedtheFundament alri
ghts.
Ar
ti
cle15(
2):
Art
icl
e15(2)st
atesthatnoindiv
idual
shall
besubj
ect
edt
orest
ri
cti
on,
anydi
sabi
l
ity
oranyot
herform ofdiscr
iminat
ionwit
hregar
dto:

 Ar
ti
cle15(
2)wasi
nvokedi
nthecaseNai
nsukhdasv
/sSt
ateofUt
tarPr
adesh.
 Inthi
sinstance,t
hestatehadconst
ruct
eddi
sti
nctelect
ionboar
dsforv
ari
ous
rel
i
gions.Thecour tr
uledt
hatthegover
nmentcannotdi
scri
minat
eagai
nst
anyindi
vidual.
Ar
ti
cle15(
3):
Thissect
ionhasnoef f
ectonthest
ate'
sabil
it
ytoenactspeci
fi
clegisl
ati
onf
or
womenandchi l
dren.Thestat
ehastheauthori
tyt
oprovi
departi
cular
accommodationsforwomenandchildr
enunderthisar
ti
cle.
Thecour
trul
edinthecaseYusufAbdulAzizv/sStat
eofBombay3thatonl
ymen
cancommitadul
teryandbepuni
shedforitunderSecti
on497oft
heIPC.Thecour
t
al
sodecidedthatawomancannotbepenali
sedforaidi
ngandabet
ti
ng,
ast
his
woul
dviolat
eAr t
icl
es14and15oftheConsti
tut
ion.
Accordingtothecourt,becauseart15(3)i
saspecificprovisi
oncr
eatedbythestat
e
forwomen, thewomanwasspar edunderthi
sarti
cle.Adult
erywasdecrimi
nal
ised
recentl
yinJosephShinev /sUnionofIndia4becausei tvi
olat
edArt14,15,
and21of
theIndi
anConst i
tut
ion.Asar esult
,iti
snolongerconsideredacri
meandcanonl y
beusedasabasi sfordi vor
ce.
Ar
ti
cle15(
4):
Thef i
rstamendmenttotheConsti
tut
ionaddedthi
sart
icl
e.Thisarti
clewasaddedby
ourIndianConst
it
uti
on'
sconsti
tuentassembly,
whichauthor
edit.Thisar
ti
clegi
ves
thestatetheaut
hori
tytoest
abl
ishspecif
icarr
angementsfor
:

 Backwar
dcl
assesofci
ti
zens
 Schedul
ecl
ass
 Schedul
etr
ibes
ThecaseSt at
eofMadr asvs.C.Dorai
raj
an5isahistori
cdecisionthatresul
tedi
nthe
additi
onofArti
cl
e15(4)totheIndi
anconsti
tut
ion.Thisi
sIndia'sfi
rsti
mpor t
antcour
t
decisi
ondeali
ngwithreser
vati
ons.TheMadrashighcourtissuedar uli
ngthat
reservedseat
singovernmentposi
ti
onsandhighereducati
oni nsti
tuti
onsbasedon
caste.

AccordingtotheSupremeCourt,
reser
v at
ionunderart
icl
e15(
4)ispurel
ybased
onCast e.I
tfurt
hersai
dthatar
ti
cle15(4)doesnotcontai
nanyreser
vati
onsbasedon
thephrasesbackwardandmor ebackwardclasses,
nordoesitgi
veany
classi
fi
cati
onbasedont hesameterms.

Art
icle15(5):Thestateisempower edundert hisarti
cletoenactprovisi
onst hatai
d
i
ntheupl if
tmentofsoci al
l
yandeducat i
onallybackwar dcommuni t
ies,suchas
ScheduledCast esandScheduledTr i
bes.Undert hisarti
cle,t
hestatehast he
authori
tytoimposel awsthatapplytoalleducat i
onalinst
itut
es,whetherst at
e-ai
ded
ornot,regardl
essoft heminor
ityeducati
onal insti
tut
esment i
onedinAr t
icl
e30( 1)
.

Arti
cle15(5),whichsolelyservesasa" enabl i
ngsecti
on,"wasaddedt othe93r d
amendi ngact.I
nt hecase" AshokaKumarThakurv sUnionofIndia"8,t
hiswas
determined.Inaddit
ion,thecourtdeclaredi nthecase"T.M.A.PaiFoundation"9that
underAr t19(1)
(g)oftheI ndi
anConstitution,anindi
vidualhasthefreedom tocreate
andgov ernanypr i
vateeducationali
nstituti
on.Asar esult
,thecourtexpli
cit
lystat
ed
thatart15(5)doesnoti nfri
ngeart19(1)

Whil
eallt
heabovediscussedmutual
l
ydealwi
thArt15,
thecourthav
ealways
uphel
dbothArt15(
4)andAr t15(
5)ar
eval
idandbothofthem ar
enotcont
radi
cti
ng
toeachot
her.
Mandal Case:
Theconceptofacr eamylayerwasusedinthiscase.Int hecaseIndir
aSawhneyv s
UnionofIndia,
theideaofaCreamyLay erwasest abli
shed.10.TheSupr emeCourt
rul
edthatOBCswi llbegi
vena27per centpr
eferenceingov ernmentpositi
ons.Inthi
s
sit
uati
on,itwasalsoindi
cat
edthatthereser
vewoul donlybeofferedforthefi
rst
phasesofappointmentsandnotforthesubsequentpr omotionprocess.

Thetotalamountofreser
vati
onsmustnotsur pass50%.(Because22. 5per
centis
al
readysetupforSCsandSTs. )Fol
lowingtheIndi
raSawhneycase, numerousstate
governmentsandothergover
ningbodieshavev ot
edinfavouroftheMandal Report
,
deemingitgenui
ne.Thiscasewasbr oughtupunderArt
icl
e16( 4)oftheConsti
tuti
on.

Ar
ti
cle15(
6):
Thisarti
clegi
vest hegov ernmenttheauthor
it
ytoestabli
shspeci f
icprovi
sionsfor
theadvancementof" economicall
yweakergroups"ofsociet
y,includi
ngreservat
ions
i
neducat i
onalinstit
utions.In2019,t
he103rdamendmentwasaddedt othe
Constit
uti
on.Inaddi ti
on,10%oft hereser
vat
ionmustbesetasi deforEWS,
accordi
ngt ot
hear t
icl
e.Thistenpercentofr
eservat
ionsisindependentofany
curr
entreserv
at i
oncei li
ngs.

ARTI
CLE16
Arti
cle16oft heConst i
tuti
onhasbeeni mplementedasthegeneralr
ulet
hatprovi
des
theciti
zensoft hecountry(noforeignerorref
ugee)withequit
yandequalopport
unit
y
toempl oyeesirrespect
iveoftheirbackgroundorgenderwithaspeci
al
recommendat ionundert heStatewi t
houtanyarbi
trar
iness.
Arti
cle16( 1)oft heConst i
tut i
onprovi
desthat,
“Thereshal
lbeequalit
yofoppor t
unity
foral
lciti
zensi nmat ter
sr elati
ngtoemploymentorappointmenttoanyof fi
ceunder
theState”andaccor dingtoAr ti
cle16(
2),“
Noci t
izenshal
l,
ongr oundsonlyofreli
gion,
race,caste, sex,descent,placeofbirt
h,r
esidenceoranyoft hem,beinel
igi
blefor,or
discr
iminat edagai nstinrespectof,anyemploymentorofficeundertheState”
.
Clause1ofArti
cle16guar ant
eesf
reedom i
nt hematt
ersofemploymentundert
he
governmentsect
orsonlyandcaseofanyv i
olati
onoftheri
ghtbytheof
fi
cial
sor
authori
ti
es,
theoffendershall
bepenal
izedf
orsuchinfri
ngement.
However,i
faprivatesectorprovi
desthej
obopportunit
ytotheindi
vidual
sunderthe
ambitofArt
icl
e16oft heConsti
tuti
ontoperf
ormtheirmoralduty,
thesectori
ssaid
tomakeanout standingeff
orttoprovi
deequali
tyt
oev er
ycit
izenthoughnotbeing
boundedtoperform suchduty.
Art
icl
e16(1)oftheConst
it
uti
onassuressuchopport
unit
yunderthestateorcenter
menti
onedunderArt
icl
e12andnottot hepr
ivat
esectorandthusincaseofany
ref
usaloft
heemploymentbyanypri
vatebodyoracorporat
ion,t
heindiv
idualcannot
seekt
othecour
tfori
nfr
ingementoft
hef
undament
alr
ightunderAr
ti
cle16.
Itcanbeseenf rom thejudgmentoftheStateofJ&K.VsK. V.N. o[2]wher
T.Khol eit
wasobser vedthatArticl
e16oft heConsti
tut
ionisval
i
dlyapplicableonthe
governmentsect or
s,thestate,t
hecentr
algovernment,andtheirsubor
dinatesand
everyindi
vidualhastherighttoappoi
ntmentunderthestatebasedont heir
capabili
ti
es.
Arti
cle16( 2)lay sdownt hegr oundsonwhi chthecit
izensshouldnotbe
discri
mi natedagai nstforthepur poseofemploymentorappoi nt
mentt oanyoffi
ce
undert heSt ate.Theprohi bitedgr oundsofdi
scri
minationunderArticl
e16(2)ar
e
reli
gion,race, cast
e,sex, descent ,bir
thpl
ace,r
esi
dence, oranyofthem.Thewor ds
‘
anyempl oy mentorof ficeundert hestat
e’menti
onedi nclause2ofAr t
icl
e16
i
mpl iesthatt hesaidpr ov i
sionr efer
sonlytopubli
cempl oymentandnott othe
empl oymenti nt hepriv
at esect or.
Arti
cle16(3)prov
idestheexcepti
onalpower
stot hepar li
amenttomakepr ovi
sions
fortheresi
dentsofaparti
cularst
ateanduni
ont err
it
or yforexampletheparl
iament
canmakear ul
ethatonlytheresi
dent
sofDelhiareeligibl
etoapplyforthepart
icul
ar
j
obunderst atebuttheappli
cantmusthavethedomi cil
ecertif
icat
ewhileapply
ing.
Moreover
,thePubli
cEmployment(ResidenceRequir
ement s)Act
,1957wasenacted
bythepar
liamenttomaketheresi
denceanecessar yfact
orinpubli
cemploymentin
somestatesi.
e.Andhr
aPradesh,Manipur,Tr
ipur
a,andHimachal Pr
adesh.
However
,itwaslateraboli
shedinmajorstatesi
n1974,duet
olackofcandidates,
andaspertherecentrecords;
theacti
sstill
appli
cabl
ewithaspeci
alpr
ovisionin
Art
icl
e371DforAndhr aPradeshandTelangana.
Arti
cle16(4)oftheConstit
uti
onpr ovi
desthat,Not
“ hi
ngi nt
hisArt
icl
eshal
lpr
event
theStatefr
om maki nganyprovi
sionforthereser
vati
onofappoint
mentsorpostsI
n
favorofanybackwar dcl
assofciti
zens,whichintheopini
onoftheStat
e,i
snot
adequatel
yrepresentedI
ntheserv i
cesundertheState.
”
Theter
m‘ backwardcl
ass’
hasbeenusedi
nAr
ti
cl
e15(
4)andt
hussi
mil
arl
ybeen
i
nter
pret
edi nArt
icl
e16(4)
.
Furt
hermore,bei
nginthesimil
arnatureofupli
ft
ingtheweakersecti
onsand
provi
dingr
eservat
ionforthei
rbenefi
t,Art
icl
e16(4)prov
idesspecialpr
ovi
sionsand
opport
unit
iesfort
heciti
zensthatbelongtothebackwardclassestoappl
yf or
employmentunderthestate.
[
5]
Howev er,i
nt hecaseofM. R.Balaj
iVstheStateofMy sore, theorderhasbeen
passedi ntheaspectofArticl
e15(4)anditwashel dthatpov ert
y,occupati
on,pl
ace
ofhabitati
on, orot
hernecessaryfact
orsshallbeconsideredf orascert
aini
nga
part
icularclassasabackwar dsectorrat
herthanjustthecast eofaper son.
Arti
cle16(
4)canbeunderst
oodwithanexamplei.
e.UPSChas1000seatsin2020,
75seatsoutofthem wer
ereser
vedforSTsbutonly50STcandidat
esweresel
ected
ther
eforet
heremaini
ng25seatswil
lbeaddedintheyear2021.
[6]
I
nthecaseofDev
adasanVsUni
onofI
ndi
a, theGov
ernmentf
ramedt
he“
car
ry
forwardr
ule”t
hatmonit
orst
heappoint
menti
nserv
icesundert
hest at
eofthose
cit
izenswhobelongt
obackwar
dclasseswasgi
ventheConsti
tut
ionalval
i
dit
y.
[
7]
Inthecaseof,K.
C.VasanthKumarVsThest at
eofKarnataka, itwashel
dthat
theremustbeav al
idreasonf
orreser
vat
ionandmustpasst hereasonabl
etestt
o
ensurethatt
hereserv
ationmadeforci
ti
zensofthebackwardclasswasnecessary
.
Itwasalsoobserv
edt hatr
eservat
ionpoli
cyshal
lber
eeval
uat
edev eryf
ivey
ear
sori
n
caseifaclasshasreachedthatpointwher
ereser
vat
ioni
snotrequir
edanymor
e.
I
nt hecaseof ,Raj
ast
hanSt ateEl
ect ri
cit
yBoar dAccountantsAssociat
ion,JaipurVs
[
8]
RajasthanStateEl
ectr
ici
tyBoard, i twashel dvali
dbytheSupr emeCour tthatinthe
mat t
erofpromot i
onbasedoneducat ionalquali
fi
cati
ons,theauthori
ti
escandeny
thepr omoti
onoftheempl oyeetot hehigherpostpossessinglesserquali
fi
cations
andt husshall
notbeani nfr
ingementoft hef undamentalri
ght.
I
nthecaseofT.M.A.Pai Foundat
ionVsStat
eofKar nataka[9]andP.A.I
namdarVs
[
10]
St
ateofMaharasht
ra i twasheldbytheSupremeCour tthatr eser
vat
ionscannot
beenf
orcedonPrivat
eUnai dededucat
ionali
nsti
tut
ions.
AMENDMENTS
I
nt hecaseofI ndraSawneyVsUni onofI
ndia[11],
thereserv
at i
onswer egiv
en
Const i
tuti
onalvali
dit
ybytheSupremeCourtandhel dthatthereservati
onswouldbe
restr
ictedtoini
tialappoi
ntment
sandwouldnotext endtopr omotionsandt hust
he
totalreser
vati
onmustnotexceed50%.
Thereser
vati
onschemeinIndi
ahasdevelopedovertheyear
sf orpr
ovi
dingequal
i
ty
ofopport
uni
tyinmatt
ersofemploymentandt omakesurethatnooneisdepri
vedof
suchopport
unit
yduetothei
rdepri
vedbackgroundorgender.
Thesesy
stemshav
ebeenaddedi
ntheConst
it
uti
onaf
terv
ari
ousAmendment
si.
e.
the77thAmendmentwhi chi nt
roducedArt
icl
e16( 4)(
A)andal
lowedreser
vat
ionf
or
SCsandSTsi npromotions,againamendedast he85thAmendmentthat
provi
dedconsequenti
alseniori
tytosuchcandidateswhohaveunder
gone
accel
erat
edpromotion.
Howev er
,in1995Ar t
icl
e16( 4)(A)wasinsert
edbyt he77t hAmendmentActto
conti
nuether eser
vat
ionofSCsandSTsi npromot i
onwhi chagainamendedbythe
85thAmendmentActt opr
ov idethebenefi
tof‘consequential
senior
it
ytoSCsand
STswhower ebeingpromotedbyr eser
vati
on.
I
nt hecaseofM.Nagar ajVsUnionofI a[12],
ndi itwasobservedt hatwhent herei
sa
reservat
ionofpr
omotion,ithastobeensur edt hatthegovernmentest abli
shesthe
backwardnessofSC/STbenef i
ciar
ies.Itwashel dthatindi
vi
dual s“i
nthe‘ cr
eamy
l
ay erofOBCs”don’
thav etheri
ghttobet hebenef ici
ari
esoft hereserv
at i
onpoli
cy.
”

t
he81stAmendmentthati
ntr
oducedAr
ti
cle16(
4)(
B),
andConst
it
uti
onal
val
i
dit
yof
t
hecarr
y-f
orwar
drul
e,
Thecarryfor
wardruleoft
heunfi
ll
edvacanci
eswasaddedi
nArti
cle16(4)(B)oft
he
Consti
tuti
onwhichmeansthatunfi
l
ledreser
vedv
acanci
escanbecarr
yforward
ever
yyearwithoutl
imit
s.
Arti
cle16( 4)(B)wasi nsti
tutedbyt he81stAmendmentandst at
es,“Not hi
ngi nthi
s
Arti
cleshal lpreventtheSt atef r
om consideringanyunf i
ll
edv acanciesofay ear
whichar er eservedforbeingf i
ll
edupint haty earinaccor
dancewi t
hanypr ovisi
on
forreservationmadeundercl ause(4)orcl ause( 4A)asasepar ateclassof
vacanciest obef i
l
ledupi nanysucceedi ngy earoryearsandsuchcl assofv acanci
es
shallnotbeconsi deredtoget herwiththev acanciesofthey earinwhi chtheyar e
beingfil
ledupf ordeterminingt heceil
i
ngoff ift
ypercentreservati
ononat otal
numberofv acanciesofthaty ear
.”

103r
dAmendmenti
nser
tedcl
ause6i
nAr
ti
cle16.
I
n2019,thr
oughthe103rdAmendmentAct
,theCent
ralGov
ernmentofI
ndi
a
i
ntr
oducedthenewclausei
.e.cl
ause6i
nArt
icl
e16whichstat
esthat
:
“Nothingint
hisArti
cleshal
lpr
eventtheStatefr
om maki nganyprovi
sionfort
he
reserv
ationofappoint
mentsorpostsinfavorofanyeconomi cal
l
yweakersect i
ons
ofciti
zensothert
hant hecl
assesmentionedinclause(4),i
naddit
iontotheexist
ing
reserv
ationandsubjecttoamaximum oftenpercent.ofthepostsineachcategory
.”
I
tprovi
desther
eser
vati
onforEconomi
cal
lyWeakerSect
ionsbypr
ovi
dingthem 10%
quot
aamongGeneralCategor
ycandi
dat
esingover
nmentjobsandeducat
ional
i
nsti
tut
ions.

ARTI
CLE17(
UNTOUCHABI
LITY)
Arti
cle17i sbanni
ngUnt ouchabi
li
tyi
nIndi
ai nal
lit
sform.Iti
smadepuni shableby
l
aw.Thewor dUnt
ouchabili
tyi
sputunderinvert
edcommasi nAr ti
cle17.Thismeans
thatthemeani ngofUntouchabil
it
yshoul
dnotbet akeninit
sli
teralgrammat ical
sense.Rat hert
hanthatthemeaningofUntouchabil
it
yshouldbeunder stoodby
putti
ngt heIndi
ansociet
yi nmind.I
nIndi
ansociety,
Untouchabi
lit
ywasf ollowedby
theHi nduCastesystem whichmadeShudr asasanuntouchablecaste.
​r
A t
icl
e17isaveryi
mpor t
antpartoftheRighttoEqual
it
y.I
tnotonl
yprov
ides
equal
it
ybutal
sosocial
justi
ce.Thisart
icl
einawayi ssi
milart
othe13TH
AmendmentoftheAmer i
canConst i
tut
ionwhichbanned Slav
ery i
nalli
tsf
orms.
I
mpor
tantLawsmadebyt
heGov
ernmentf
orAr
ti
cle17
Iti
sessenti
altounderst
andt hattheabol
it
ionofUnt ouchabili
tyi
spuni shabl
ebylaw.
Thepowertocr eat
elawstoi mplementtheFundament alrightsaregivenunder
Arti
cle35oftheConstit
uti
onofI ndi
a.
UsingthepowergiventothePar l
iamentunderAr t
icl
e35t hegov er
nment
cr edUnt
eat ouchabil
it
y(offences)Act,
1955, l
aterthi
sactwasamendedandanew
actismadewhi chwasnamedasThePr otect
ionofCi v
ilRightsAct,1955.
1.ThePr
otect
ionofCi
vi
lRi
ght
sAct
,1955
​hi
T sactisgivingvari
ousprovisi
onsforthefightagai
nsttheUntouchabil
i
ty.Thisact
i
smaki ngall
theoffencesagainsttheUntouchabil
it
yasnon-compoundabl e.Iti
s
i
mportanttounderstandthatthi
slawmadei tcompulsor
yforapublicservantto
i
nvest
igateeverycomplaint
.IfaPublicserv
antisnotdoinghisdutythenhewi l
lbe
madeapar toftheabettoroftheAct.Anykindofpreachi
ngofUnt ouchabil
ityisal
so
madepunishableunderthisAct.
2.Schedul
eCast
eandSchedul
eTr
ibe(
Prev
ent
ionofAt
roci
ti
es)Act
,1989​
​hi
T si
sav eryi
mportantActwhichismadet opr
eventtheatrociti
esagai
nstthe
Schedul
eCast eandScheduleTri
be.Thi
sActmadet heest
ablishmentofspeci
al
court
stodecidethecasesrelat
edtothecommissionofoffencesunderthisact.
Secti
on18oft hi
sActmakest hecommi ssi
onofoffencesundert hi
sActanon-
bai
labl
eoffence.
People’
sUni onforDemocrati
cRightsv .UnionofI ndia,AIR1982
TheSupr
​ emeCour tsai
dthatwhent her i
ghtsunderAr t
icl
e17wi l
lbeviol
atedbyany
pri
vateindi
v i
dualt
henitwil
lbetheresponsi bil
it
yoft hest at
etotakeacti
on
i
mmedi ately.Thi
sismadet oensuret hatthepoorSCandSTcommuni tyof
untouchablesneednotcomet ocour tjustforenforci
ngt hei
rfundamentalri
ght
s.
StateofKar nat
akav .AppaBaluI
ngal e,AI
R1993
I
​
nt hiscase,therespondentwasconv ict
edbythelowercour
tsbutacqui
tt
edbyt he
Highcour tonthechar geofst
oppingt hepeopl
efrom l
owercast
etousethenewl y
dugbor ewel l
.Hewasacqui tt
edbyt hehighcourt
.Therewasatest
imonygiven
againsttherespondentby4Har i
jans.
Thisledtoanaccept anceoftheJudgmentoft helowercour
tsbytheSupremeCour t
.
3.SafaiKaramchar i
AndolanandOr s.v.Uni
onofI ndiaandOrs.
Awr
​ i
tunderArticle32wasf i
ledbythePetit
ionersprayi
ngfortheenforcement
ofManual Scavengers’
andConst r
uct i
onofDr yLatr
ines(Pr
ohibit
ion)Act,
1993by
theCent r
alGovernment,Stat
eGov ernmentsandUni onTerr
it
ories.I
nthiscase,
the
Courtissuedvariousdi
recti
ons:
1.Rehabi
l
itat
ionofal
lthemanual
scav
enger
s
2.Gi
vi
ngSchol
arshi
pst
othechi
l
drenofManual
Scav
enger
s.
3.Gi
vi
ngone-
ti
mecashassi
stancet
omanual
scav
enger
s.
4.Onememberoft
hei
rfami
l
yshoul
dbegi
venski
l
ltr
aini
ngi
nli
vel
i
hood.
5.Ot
herl
egal
assi
stanceasneededf
ort
hem.
6.Compensat
ionof10Lakhr
upeesf
orev
erysewerdeat
h.

ARTI
CLE18
(
1)Not
it
le,
notbei
ngami
l
itar
yoracademi
cdi
sti
nct
ion,
shal
lbeconf
err
edbyt
he
St
ate.
(
2)Noci
ti
zenofI
ndi
ashal
lacceptanyt
it
lef
rom anyf
orei
gnSt
ate.
(
3)Noper sonwhoisnotacit
izenofIndi
ashall
,whil
eheholdsanyoffi
ceofpr
ofitor
t
rustundertheSt
ate,
acceptwithoutt
heconsentofthePr
esidentanyt
it
lef
rom any
f
orei
gnSt at
e.
(4)Nopersonholdinganyofficeofpr
ofitort
rustundert
heStateshal
l
,wit
houtt
he
consentofthePresident
,acceptanypresent
,emolument,orof
fi
ceofanykindf
rom
orunderanyforei
gnSt at
e.

1.
4Pr
ohi
bit
ionofDi
scr
imi
nat
ionUnderAr
ti
cle15
Sameasabov
e

1.
5Equal
i
tyofOppor
tuni
tyi
nMat
ter
sofPubl
i
cEmpl
oyment
Sameasabov
e

MODULE2

2.
1Ri
ghtt
oFr
eedoms(
Art
icl
e19)
Asbef orethemakingoftheconst
it
uti
onourcountr
ywasbei
ngr
uledbyfor
eigner
s
foraround200y earsandnot
hingli
kefundament
alri
ght
swer
epartofourI
ndianl
aw
duringthatti
me.Sowhi l
emakingofarti
cle19t
herewer
emanyt
hingstodi
scussto
giveourciti
zensofIndi
aarealfr
eedom.

Theconst
it
uti
onofI
ndi
apr
ovi
dessi
xfundament
alf
reedom r
ight
sunderar
ti
cle19.
Art
icle19i scoveredunderpar tthreeoftheconst it
uti
on.Al lthesi xri
ght
scov ered
underar t
icl
e19deal swithprov i
dingfreedom t othecit
izensofI ndi awhichcanonly
becur t
ail
edbyor derofstateincaseofemer gencyoront hebasi sofgrounds
ment i
onedi ncl
ause( 2)ofthisarticl
e.
Earl
iertherewere7f reedom rightscoveredunderar ti
cle19butbyt he44th
amendmentt heRighttoHol dandDi sposePr operty[1]
ear l
ierincludedinclause1
subclausefofar ticl
e19wasdel etedandi ncludedinarticle300Aandnowt hisri
ght
i
snomor eafundament alr
ightithasnowbecomeanor dinaryright.

Ther
earesixclausesinart
icl
e19thef i
rstone{19(1)
}dealswitht
hei
mport
ant
fr
eedom r
ight
sand{ 19(2)
-19(6)
}dealswithtestsforrest
ri
cti
onsi
mposedon
fr
eedom.
Thesixf
reedom ri
ghtscoveredunderarti
cle19(1)are:
 19(1)(
a)
Righttof
reedom ofspeechandexpr
essi
on
 19(1)(
b)
Righttoassembl
epeacef
ull
ywi
thoutar
ms
 19(1)(
c)
Freedom t
ofor
m associ
ati
ons
 19(1)(
d)
Righttomov
efr
eel
yint
err
it
oryofI
ndi
a
 19(1)(
e)
Righttoset
tl
eint
err
it
oryofI
ndi
a
 19(1)(
g)
Freedom oft
radeandpr
ofessi
on
Meani
ng
Aspert
hebar
elanguaget
hear
ti
cle19i
sdef
inedasf
oll
ows:
Pr
otect
ionofcer
tai
nri
ght
sregar
dingf
reedom ofspeechet
c
1.Al
lci
ti
zensshal
lhav
ether
ight
a.t
ofr
eedom ofspeechandexpr
essi
on;
b.t
oassembl
epeaceabl
yandwi
thoutar
ms;
c.t
ofor
m associ
ati
onsoruni
ons;
d.t
omov
efr
eel
ythr
oughoutt
het
err
it
oryofI
ndi
a;
e.t
oresi
deandset
tl
einanypar
toft
het
err
it
oryofI
ndi
a;andomi
tt
ed
f
.topr
act
iseanypr
ofessi
on,
ort
ocar
ryonanyoccupat
ion,
tradeorbusi
ness

2.Not
hingi
nsubcl
ause(
a)ofcl
ause(1)shal
laf
fectt
heoper
ati
onofany
 exi
stinglaw, orpr
eventtheSt atef
rom makinganyl aw,insof arassuchl aw
i
mposesr easonablerest
ri
ctionsont heexerci
seoft herightconf er
redbythe
sai
dsubcl auseintheint
erestsoft hesover
eigntyandintegr i
tyofIndi
a,t
he
securit
yoft heStat
e,fri
endlyrelat
ionswithforei
gnSt at
es, publi
corder,
decencyormor al
it
yorinrelationtocontemptofcour t,
def amationor
i
ncitementt oanoffence.

3.Not hi
ngi nsubclause( b)oft
hesaidclauseshallaf
fectt
heoperati
onofany
existi
ngl awinsofarasi timposes,
orpr eventt
heStatefr
om makinganylaw
i
mposi ng, i
ntheinterestsofthesov
ereigntyandint
egri
tyofIndi
aorpubli
c
order,reasonabl
er estr
icti
onsontheexer ci
seoftheri
ghtconfer
redbythe
saidsubcl ause

4.Not hinginsubclause( c)ofthesaidclauseshallaffecttheoper

ati
onofany
existinglawinsofarasi timposes,orpr ev
enttheSt atefrom maki
nganyl
aw
i
mposi ng,i
ntheinterestsofthesovereigntyandintegrit
yofIndi
aorpubl
ic
orderormor alit
y,r
easonabl erest
ri
cti
onsont heexerciseoftheri
ght
conf err
edbyt hesaidsubcl ause

5.Nothinginsubclauses( d)and( e)[

2]ofthesaidclauseshal
laffectthe
operati
onofanyexistinglawi nsof arasitimposes,orprev
entt heStat
efrom
makinganylawi mposi ng,reasonablerestr
icti
onsontheexerci
seofanyof
theri
ghtsconfer
redbyt hesaidsubcl auseseitheri
ntheint
erestsofthe
generalpubl
icorforthepr otecti
onoft heinter
estsofanyScheduledTribe

6.Nothingi nsubcl ause( g)ofthesaidclauseshallaff

ecttheoperat
ionofany
exi
stingl awi nsof arasitimposes,orpr ev
enttheStatefrom maki
nganyl aw
i
mposi ng,intheinterestsofthegeneralpublic,
reasonabler
estr
ict
ionsont he
exerciseoft herightconf err
edbythesai dsubclause,and,i
nparti
cular
,
nothingint hesaidsubcl auseshal
laffecttheoperati
onofanyexisti
nglawi n
sofarasi trel
atest o,orpreventt
heStatef r
om makinganyl awrel
ati
ngt o:

a.Thepr
ofessi
onalort
echnical
qual
if
icat
ionsnecessar
yforpr
acti
sing
anypr
ofessi
onorcarr
yingonanyoccupati
on,t
radeorbusi
ness,or
b.Thecarryi
ngonbyt heSt
ate,orbyacorpor
ati
onownedorcontroll
edby
theState,
ofanytr
ade,busi
ness,i
ndustr
yorservi
ce,whet
hert
ot he
excl
usion,compl
eteorpart
ial
,ofci
ti
zensorother
wise.
Fr
eedom OfSpeechAndExpr
essi
on
19(
1)(
a)
Iti
sheldtobebasicandi ndiv
isibl
eri
ghti
tisacher
ishedandsecretrightitgives
cit
izensfr
eedom topropagatev i
ewsinanyfor
m whetherwords,
gest ures,pict
ure,
art,
newspaperetc.I
tisessentialtot
herul
eoflawandliber
tyofcit
izensi tthe
foundati
onofademocr aticsociet
y.

Thisfr
eedom isgi
ventothecit
izenstoensurethattheypart
ici
pateinthepubl i
c
acti
vi
ti
es.Theyfor
m anopinionandhaveawor dt osayinpubli
cact i
vi
ties.Thisi
s
whyitisanimport
antaspectofademocr acy.Apersoncanexpr esshisv i
ewsonany
i
ssueandt hr
oughanymedi um whichhewishes.Nocount r
yinwor l
dguar antees
fr
eedom ofspeechinabsol
uteterms.
19(
1)(a)alongwithrest
ri
cti
onasment ionedin19(2)
Asfrom theint
roducti
onwecamet oknowt hatsubcl
ause(
a)ofarti
cle19(1)deal
s
wit
hf r
eedom ofspeechandexpr essi
onand19( 2)pr
ovi
desareasonablerest
ri
cti
on
tot
hisrightwhicharementionedasfoll
ows:
1.I
nterest
sofsov
erei
gnt
yandi
ntegr
it
yofI
ndi
a.(
Addedby16t
hAmendment
,
1963)
2.Secur
it
yoft
hest
ate;
3.Fr
iendl
yrel
ati
onswi
thf
orei
gnst
ates;
(Addedby1stAmendment
,1951)
4.Publ
i
cor
der
;(Addedby1stAmendment
,1951)
5.Decencyormor
ali
ty;
6.Cont
emptofcour
t;
7.Def
amat
ion;
8.I
nci
tementt
oanof
fence;

Ar
ti
cle19(
1)(
a)al
soi
ncl
udesRi
ghtToBeSi
l
ent

Art
icl
e19(1)(
a)contai
nsFreedom ofSpeechandexpressi
onso, wi
thi
nthescopeof
i
talsocontai
nsRightt
oSilence.Thefamouscase(nati
onalant
hem case)r
elat
ingt
o
thi
sri
ghtismenti
onedbelow:

BijoeEmmanuel v
.StateofKerala(NationalAnt
hem Case)(1986)
[4]
I
nt hi
scase,t
heSupremeCour theldthatthethr
eestudentswerenotgui
l
tyof
disrespectt
otheNational
Anthem justbecausetheyrefusedtosi
ngit
.Moreov
er,
theydidstandinr
espectwhenev ertheNat i
onal
Anthem wasbeingsung.
Fr
eedom OfPr
essUnderFr
eedom OfSpeechAndExpr
essi
on
I
tstat
esthatnoadmini
str
ati
veorstat
utorycontr
olshoul
dbei mpl
ement
edon
pr
opagat
ionofinf
ormati
on,knowl
edge,ideas,
andthoughts.

I
tisset
tl
edl
awt
hatt
her
ightt
ofr
eedom ofspeechandexpr
essi
oni
ncl
udest
he
l
ibert
yofthepress.Pr
essi ssupposedt
oguardpubl
icint
erestbybri
ngingt of
oret
he
misdeeds,f
ail
i
ngsandl apsesofthegover
nmentandotherbodiesexer
cising
governi
ngpowerright
ly,t
herefor
e,i
thasbeendescr
ibedastheFourthEstate

ThePresshasthesamer i
ghtsasthoseofanindiv
idualitcannotcl
aim betterr
ight
s.
Thefr
eedom ofpressisnotconf
inedtonewspapersandper iodi
cal
s.Itincl
udes
pamphlet
s,ci
rcul
ars,
andev er
ysortofi
nfor
mat i
onwhi chaffordsavehicleof
i
nfor
mat i
onandopinion.

Somei mportantcaselawsr el
ati
ngtoabov ear ementionedbelow:
BrijBhushanandAnr .v.StateofDelhi(1950)[
5]
Inthiscase,Supr emeCour thighli
ghtedthatrestr
ict
ionont heli
bertyofthepress
unlessitcreatesadangert otheStateistherestri
cti
onont hefreedom ofspeech
andexpr essi
onaspr ovi
dedunderAr ticl
e19( 1)(a)oftheIndianConstit
uti
on.This
decisionalsoconf i
rmst heUni t
edNat i
onsDecl ar
ati
onofHumanRi ght
s,1948
standardsoff reedom ofopi ni
onandexpr ession.

RomeshThapperv .Stat
eofMadr as( 1950)[
6]
TheCourt,whi
lerul
ingont hevalidi
tyoft hei
mpugnedor dert
hatbannedtheentry
andcir
culat
ionoftheweekl ymagazi neintocertai
npartsofMadras,hel
dt hatt
he
fr
eedom ofspeechandexpr essionincludesfreedom ofpropagat
ionofideasthat
canonlybeensuredbycirculat
ion.

Sakalpapersv.UnionofIndi
a(1961)[
7]
Therighttofr
eedom ofspeechandexpr essi
onwhichisani nt
egralpartofour
democr at
icsoci
etyincl
udesthefr
eedom ofthepress,freedom ofcir
culati
on,
fr
eedom ofpublicati
on,anddi
sseminati
onofone'sviewsandopi nions.Hencethe
Governmentshoul dnotpassanyactsthatcr
eat
econf l
ictsamongt hef undament
al
ri
ghtsoftheciti
zens.
AreCommer ci
alAdv erti
sementpar toffr
eedom ofspeech?
Hamdar dDawakhanavUni onofI ndi
a(1960)[8]
Thev al
idityoftheDr ugandMagi cRemedies(Object
ionableAdv erti
sement)Act,
whichputr estr
icti
onsonadv ert
isementofdrugsincertai
ncasesandpr ohibi
ted
adverti
sement sofdr ugshav i
ngmagi cquali
ti
esforcuringdi seaseswaschallenged
onthegr oundt hatther est
ricti
ononadv erti
sementabridgedt hef r
eedom.The
SupremeCour theldt hatanadv erti
sementisnodoubtaf orm ofspeechbutev ery
adverti
sementwashel dtobedeal i
ngwithcommer ceort radeandnotf or
propagatingideas.

TataPressv.MTNL( 1995)[9]
TheSupremeCour trul
edthattheMTNLhasnor
ightt
ohol
dbackTat
aPr
essLt
d
fr
om publi
shingTataYell
owPages

Ri
ghttobeinfor
med
I
nfor
mationtocit
izensisver
yimport
antnodemocrat
icgover
nmentcansur
viv
e
wi
thouti
tasithelpsinpromoti
ngdemocracy
.Itwasenact
edin2002.Aper
sonis
appoi
ntedineverygovernmenti
nsti
tut
etopr
ovi
deinf
ormati
ont
otheci
ti
zensata
ver
ynomi nal
rate.butsensi
ti
vei
nformati
oni
snotdi
scl
osed.
Ri
ghtToAssembl
ePeacef
ull
yWi
thoutAr
ms
19(1)(b)
Theassembl ymustbenon- vi
olentandmustnotcauseanybr eachofpubli
cpeace.I
f
theassemblyisdisorderl
yorri
otous,thenitisnotpr
otectedunderArti
cle19(1)(
b)
andreasonablerestr
ict
ionscanbei mposedunderclause( 3)ofArt
icl
e19i nt
he
I
nterestsofsoverei
gntyandIntegri
tyofIndiaorpubl
icorder.

Assembl yfreedom givespeopletherighttohavepubl i

cmeet ings,andtocarryout
processions.Arti
cle19(1)(
b)]al
lowsf ortheri
ghtofpeoplet omeetoneanot her
.To
accesst hi
sr i
ghtthepeople'
sassembl ymustbea)peacef ul,andb)ar ms-f
ree.I
nt he
i
nterestsof� a)publ icorder,
andb)I ndia'
ssoverei
gntyandi ntegri
ty,t
heStatemay
furt
herimposer easonablerestri
cti
ons.Also,ifmagistr
atefeelsthattherei
sat hreat
topublicorderorpeacet hathecani mposer estr
ict
ionsont hef r
eedom ofassembl y
ofpeopleunderSect ion144ofCr .P.
C.

19(1)
(b)alongwi threstr
icti
onasment i
onedin19(
3)
Asweknowt hatart
icl
e19( 1)(
b)deal
swithFREEDOM OFASSEMBLYand19(
3)l
ays
downr easonablerestri
cti
onst oi
twhichareasfol
l
ows
Groundsf orReasonabler est
ri
cti
on
1.Publ
i
cor
der
2.Mai
ntenanceofsov
erei
gnt
yandi
ntegr
it
yofI
ndi
a.
TheAssemblyunder19(1)(
b)shouldbepeacef
ulandwi
thoutar
ms.Sect
ion141of
I
PCdefineswhatanunlawfulassembl
yis.
Fr
eedom ToFor
m Associ
ati
ons
19(1)(c)
Ther ighttoform associ
ati
onincl
udest herightt
of orm companies,soci
eti
es,
partnerships,t
radeunionandpoliti
calpart
ies.Thefreedom t
of orm associ
ati
on
i
mpl iesalsothef r
eedom toform ornottoform, t
ojoinornottojoin,anassoci
ati
on
oruni on.

Art
icl
e19(1)(
c)confer
sthefreedom toform associ
ati
onsoruni
onsonthepeopl
e.
Art
icl
e19(1)(
c)provi
destherightnotonl
ytoj oi
nanassoci
ati
onbutalsot
oproceed
wit
htheassociat
ionassuch.Freeassociati
onalsomeanstheri
ghttofor
m ornot
for
m, j
oinornotj
oinanorganizati
onorunion.

I
nt hei
nterest
sof� a)publ
i
corder
,b)moral
it
y,andc)Indi
a'
ssoverei
gntyand
i
ntegri
ty,
theStat
ecanimposer
easonabl
erest
rict
ionsonfr
eedom ofassoci
ati
onor
uni
on.
19(1)
(c)al
ongwi t
hrest
ricti
onasmenti
onedi
n19(
4)
GroundsforReasonabl
er est
ri
cti
on:
1.I
nter
est
soft
hesov
erei
gnt
yandi
ntegr
it
yofI
ndi
a
2.Publ
i
cor
der
3.Mor
ali
ty
19(
1)(
c)guaranteesfreedom toform associ
ationsandco-oper
ati
vesoci
eties.
Theri
ghttoform associati
onalsoincl
udesrighttonotbepartofanassociati
on
Thepartwit
hcooper ati
v esoci
eti
eswasaddedbyt he97t
hamendmentt ogether
wit
hPARTI X-Bofconst i
tuti
onthattal
ksaboutco- oper
ati
vesoci
eti
es.
RightToMov eFr eelyInTerri
toryOfIndia19( 1)(D)&
RightToSet tl
eInTer r
itor
yOfI ndi
a19( 1)
(E)
Article19(1)(d)oft heIndianConstit
utionent i
tl
esev er
yci t
izentomovefreel
y
throughoutt het err
itoryofthecountry.Thisrightisprotectedagai
nstonl
ystate
actionandnotpr i
vateindivi
duals.Moreov er,i
tisavail
ableonlytotheci
ti
zensandto
shar ehol
dersofacompanybutnott of oreignersorlegalpersonsl
ikecompaniesor
corpor at
ions, et
c.

Art
icle19(1)
(d)guarant
eesf
reedom ofmovementinthet
err
it
or yofI
ndi
a;whi
l
e
appropri
atel
imitat
ionsmaybeplacedonthatr
ighti
nthei
nterestof:

a.thegener alpubli
c,orb)t oprotecttheinterestsofanySchedul edTribe.Of
exampl e,mov ementandt ravelrest
ri
cti
onscanbeenf or
cedtomonitor
epidemi csortopr otecttheenv i
ronmentorbi odiversi
ty,
ortopreser
vet r
ibal
cultur
esuchasJar awasi nAndaman.Li kewi se, r
estri
cti
onscanbeimposed
byaDi st r
ictMagistrateorPol i
ceCommi ssioneror dertoexcl
udeaper son
from agi venarea( Tadipar)f
orat emporar ydur ati
onofupt othreemont hs.
AccordingtoAr t
icl
e19( 1)(
e)everyci
ti
zenofI ndiahasther
ight"tor
esideandset
tl
e
i
nanypar toft heterr
itor
yofIndi
a."However,underclause(
5)ofAr t
icl
e19
reasonablerestr
icti
onmaybei mposedont hisrightbylawi
nt heint
erestoft
he
generalpubl
icorf ortheprot
ecti
onoftheinterestofanyScheduledTribe.

[
Ar t
.19(1)(e)
]grantspeopl
et hefreedom tol
ive(temporaryr
esidence)andset t
le
anywher ei
nt heIndi
anTerri
tory.Thefreedom ofmov ementandt hefreedom to
resi
deandset t
learemutuall
ycompl ementary.Thei
rpurposeistoremov ebar r
ier
s
i
nsideIndia.TheyupholdIndia'
snat i
onaluni
tyanddignity
.Ther i
ghtissubjecttofai
r
rest
rict
ionsfrom abuseandcoer cionbytheStateforthebenefi
tofthe:

a.gener
alpubl
i
c,or
b.f
ort
hesecur
it
yoft
heschedul
edt
ri
bes
Ofthesamereasonsli
stedabove,t
hefreedom t
otr
avelandl
i
veorset
tl
einnor
th-
easter
nst
atesofIndi
a,Utt
arakhandet
c.hasbeenli
mited.
19(
1)(
d&e)al
ongwi
thr
est
ri
cti
onasment
ionedi
n19(
5)

Asweknowt hatar
ti
cle19(
1)(
d)deal
swit
hRightToMoveFr
eelyI
nTer
ri
tor
yOf
I
ndiaand19(
1)(e)Ri
ghtToSett
leI
nTerr
it
oryOfIndi
a19(
5)l
aysdownr
easonabl
e
rest
ri
cti
onst
oitwhichareasf
oll
ows:

Gr
oundsf
orReasonabl
erest
ri
cti
on:
1.I
nter
est
soft
hegener
alpubl
i
c
2.Fort
hepr
otect
ionoft
hei
nter
est
sofanyschedul
edt
ri
be
Fr
eedom ToOwnPr
oper
ty:
Art
icl
e300a
44thAmendment
,1988-19(
1)(
f)AndArt
icl
e31(Ri
ghtt
oPr
oper
ty)r
emov
edf
rom
const
it
uti
onandArt
icl
e300A-Ri
ghttopr
opert
yadded.

Ar
ti
cle300Astat
esthatper
sonsnott
obedepr
ivedofpr
opertysavebyaut
hor
it
yof
l
aw.Nopersonshal
lbedepriv
edofhi
spr
opert
ysavebyauthori
tyofl
aw.
Af
tert
hisRi
ghtt
opr
oper
tyi
saconst
it
uti
onal
rightbutnotaf
undament
alr
ight
.

Fr
eedom OfTr
adeAndPr
ofessi
on
19(1)(g)
Constit
utionhasgrant edthisf undament alr
ightunderArt19(1)(g)
,fortheprosperi
ty
andwel lbei
ngofev eryonei nt hesociety
.TheSt ateensuresthatnoi ndi
vidual
resi
dingwi t
hint
het errit
orialboundari
esoft hecount ryi
sdeprivedoft hi
sr i
ghtandif
atallheis,i
twil
ltaket her equisit
emeasur est oavail
him ofanappr opri
ateremedy
andmakesur et
hatj usticeisdel i
ver
ed.Ev er
yci t
izenshoulduti
li
zethisrighttothe
bestofhiscapabili
ti
esandf orhismor alaswel l
aseconomi cprogress.

[Art
.19(1)(
g) )gr
antsaper sont hef r
eedom t ochoosethesour ceofhisorherchoi
ce
ofli
ving.Ther i
ghtcov erst herightnottochooseanunder t
akingorther i
ghttocl
ose
acompany .Thesecondr ightcomeswi thotherprovi
sionssuchaspay mentof
wagesf orjobs,pension, etc.Ther i
ghtoft hepersontocarryonacar eeris
fundamental toaman' sl i
feandt hestatedoesnotplaceanyspeci fi
crestri
cti
ononit
,
exceptforthegeneral publ ic'
sbenef i
t.Thereisofcoursenor i
ghttocarryona
dangerousori mmor al business.
19(
1)(
g)al
ongwi
thr
est
ri
cti
onasment
ionedi
n19(
6)
Asweknowt hatar
ti
cle19(1)
(g)dealswit
hFREEDOM OFTRADEANDPROFESSI
ON
and19(6)lay
sdownr easonablerest
ri
cti
onst
oitwhi
chareasfol
l
ows:
GroundsforReasonabler
estr
icti
on:
1.I
nthei
nter
est
soft
hegener
alpubl
i
c.
 2.Stat
eprescr
ibedqual
i
ficat
ionsf
orcar
ryi
ngonanypr
ofessi
onort
echni
cal
occupat
ion.
3.Stat
e-runtr
ade,
busi
ness,
indust
ry,
orservi
cethatexcl
udest
hepar
ti
cipat
ion
ofci
tizensorot
her
seit
hercomplet
elyorpart
ial
l
y.
Excel
Wearv
.Uni
onofI
ndi
a(1979)
[15]
I
twashel dt hattheri
ghtofthebusinessment ocl osedownt heirbusiness( andin
part
icul
arthemember s'r
ightofvoluntarywindingup)hast obepr otected.TheApex
CourtinExcel Wearcasebyhol di
ngt heimpugnedpr ovisi
onsasunconst it
ut i
onalhas
ri
ghtl
yprev entedthebusinessmenf r
om beingf orcedtoimploretothegov ernment
forpermissiontoclosedownt hei
rbusi nesswhi chcoul
dhav ebeeneasi l
ycddenied
bythegov ernmentarbit
rari
lyandwi t
houtanyr eason.

2.
2Pr
otect
ioni
nrespectofconv
ict
ionf
orof
fences(
Art
icl
e20)
Ar
t.20ofIndianConsti
tut
ionprovi
desf
orprotect
ioninrespectofconvi
cti
onof
of
fences.I
not herwor
ds,i
tlaysdowncert
ainsafeguardstothepersonaccusedof
cr
imesasst atedbel
ow:
1.Expostf
act
olaw(
Art
.20(
1))
.
2.Doubl
eJeopar
dy(
Art
.20(
2);
and
3.Sel
f-
incr
imi
nat
ion(
Art
.20(
3).

1.ExPostFactoLaw(Art.20(1)
:
Art
icl
e20(1)oftheI
ndianConstit
utionpr
ohibit
sExPostFactolaws.Theexpr essi
on
‘
ExPostFact oLawmeans“ alaw,whichimposespenalt
iesorconvict
ionsont he
actsal
readydoneandincreasesthepenalt
yforsuchacts”
.Inotherwords,ExPost
FacoLaw, i
mposespenalti
esretr
ospecti
vely
.

Eg.
:TheDowr yPr
ohi
bit
ionAct,1961cameintofor
cefrom 20.
5.1961.Aper
songui
l
ty
ofaccepti
ngdowryi
spunishabl
eundertheActaft
er20.5.
1961andnotbefore
20.
5.1961.

Expostf
act
olawsar
eoft
hreeki
ndsasf
oll
ows:
a.Alawwhi
chdecl
aredsomeactoromissi
onasanof
fencef
ort
hef
ir
stt
ime
af
tert
hecompl
eti
onofthatactoromi
ssi
on.
b.Alawwhichenhancesthepunishmentorpenal
tyf
oranof
fencesubsequent
t
ot hecommissi
onofthatoff
ence.
c.Alawwhichprescr
ibesanewanddi
ffer
entpr
ocedur
ef ort
hepr
osecut
ionof
anoff
encesubsequentt
othecommissi
onofthatof
fence.
Clause(1)ofArt
.20provi
desprotecti
ononl
yinrespectoft
heabovefir
sttwo
categor
iesofexpostf
actolawsi.
e.lawswhi
chdeclareactsasoff
encessubsequent
tothecommi ssi
ontothoseactsandlawswhichenhancethepenal
tysubsequent
ly.
Art
icl
e20(1)provides:Nopersonshallbeconvi
ctedofanyoff
enceexceptfor
vi
olat
ionofalawi nf or
ceattheti
meoft hecommi ssi
onoftheactchar
gedasan
of
fence,norbesubj ect
edtoapenaltygreat
erthanthatwhi
chmighthavebeen
i
nfl
ict
edundert helawi nf
orceattheti
meoft hecommi ssi
onoftheoff
ence.
Thefir
stofcl ause(1)prov
idesthat“noper
sonshal
lbeconvict
edofanyoffence
exceptforviolat
ionof‘l
awinforceattheti
meofthecommi ssi
onoftheactcharged
asanof fence�.Thi smeansthatifanacti
snotanoffenceatthedateofi
ts
commi ssionitcannotbeanof f
enceatthedat
esubsequenttoitscommissi
on.

Thesecondpartofcl
ause(1)prot
ect
sapersonfor
m‘apenal
tygr
eat
ert
hant
hat
whichhemighthavebeensubject
edtoatt
heti
meofthecommissi
onoft
heoff
ence.

ForExample: I
faper son‘Acommi t
sanof f
enceintheyear1947,aspertheacti
n
thatyeart
hepuni shmentwasi mpri
sonmentoffineorboththesameactwas
amendedi n1949whi chenhancedthepuni
shmentofthesameof fencebyas
addit
ional
fine.Insuchacaset hepunishmentenhancedwouldnotbeapplicabl
eto
theactof1947, thesamewoul dbeset-asi
de.
TheLandmar kjudgementgov er
ningt hisdoct
r i
necameintheyear1953,i
ncase
ofKedarNat hv.Stat
eofWestBengal .Inthi
scase,theHon’bl
eSupremeCour tof
Indi
aobser v
edthat,wheneveranacti sdeclaredasacrimi
naloff
enceand/ or
providespenal
tyforsamebyt helegislatur
e,i
tisalwayspr
ospecti
veinnatureand
can’tbeimplementedret
rospecti
velyt oupholdwhatisbei
ngsaidunderArticl
e20
(1).
Howev er
,onlythepr
ocedureofsent
enci
ngandconvict
ingi
swhati spr
ohi
bit
edunder
thi
sclause,andnotthet
ri
alit
self
.Thus,
apersonaccusedaccor
dingtoapart
icular
procedur
ecan’tbequesti
onedunderthi
scl
auseanddoctrneofExpostf
i act
ol aw.
Howev er
,anexcepti
onalsoexist
st otherestr
ict
ionundert
hisprovi
sion.Inthecase
ofRattanLalv
.theStateofPunjab,theHon’bl
eSupremeCour tall
owedf orsuch
retr
ospecti
vei
mpl ementat
ionofCriminalLaws,wherethei
ssueper t
inentis,
reduct
ionofpunishmentinthesaidoffence.
2.Doubl
ejeopar
dy:
Clause(
2)ofAr
ti
cle20
“
Nemodebetbi
svexar
ipr
ounaeteadem causa”
TheDoct r
ineofDoubl eJeopardy,whi
chtracesbackit
sorigi
nt oAmer i
can
j
urisprudenceofpuni shment,meansthat‘nopersoncanbepr osecutedand
punishedt wiceforthesameof fencei
nsubsequentproceedi
ngs’.And,Arti
cle20(2)
,
whichr eadst hatnoonecouldbeconv i
ctedandpunishedmor ethanoncef orthe
sameof f
encei nvol
vingthesamesetoff actsguar
anteesagainstthemulti
ple
convicti
onsandDoubl ejeopar
dy .
Themostcruci
all
andmarkjudgementcameincaseofMaqbool
Hussai
nv.St
at eof
Bombay,
wher et
hepersonaccusedwaspossessi
ngsomeamountofgol
d,which
wasagai
nstlexl
ociatt
heti
meandgol dwasconfiscat
edbyt
hecust
omsauthorit
y.
And,l
aterwhentheper
sonwasprosecut
edbef
oreacri
minalcour
t,t
hecour
twas
conf
rontedwit
hthequest
ionwhet
herthi
samountst
oDoubleJeopardy
.
But,theSupr emeCour tobserv
edt hatdepartmentalproceedings,
i.
e.byCust oms
Authorit
y,inthiscase,doesn’
tamountt ot r
ialbyajudici
altr
ibunal,
thusthe
proceedingsbef or
ethecr i
minalcourtisnotbar r
edinthiscaseandt heproceedi
ngs
cangoon.I nanutshellDepart
ment alProceedingsareindependentoftr
ialbya
j
udicialcourtortri
bunal.
3.Sel
fIncr
imi
nat
ion[
Art
.20(
3)]
:

Theexpr essi
onself-
incri
minati
onmeansconv eyinginfor
mati
onbasedupon
personalknowledgeoft hepersongiv
ingi
nfor
mat i
oninvol
vi
nghimsel
ftobethe
pri
mepar tt
akenintheof f
ence.Apersonshal
l notbeaskedtomakestatement
s
againsthimself(
i.
e.selfharmingstat
ements/
conf essi
onalst
atement
s).

Clause3ofAr t
.20oftheIndi
anConstit
utionpr
ohi
bitsself
-i
ncr
iminati
on.I
tsayst
hat
“Nopersonaccusedofanyoffenceshallbecompel
ledtobeawi tnessagai
nst
himself
”.Art
.20(3)i
sbasedont hecommonl awmaxi m nemoteneturpr
odere
accussaresei
psum,whichmeanst hat“
nomani sboundt oaccusehimself
”.

Ingr
edient
s-Theprot
ecti
onunderAr
t.20(
3)i
sav
ail
abl
e,pr
ovi
dedt
hef
oll
owi
ng
condit
ionsareful
fi
ll
ed.
:

i
. Theper
son(seeki
ngpr
otect
ionunderCl
ause3ofAr
t.20)mustbe‘
accused
ofanof
fence.
i
i
. Thepr
otect
ionisagai
nst‘
compul
siont
obeawi
tness.(
Hei
scompel
l
edt
o
gi
vewit
ness);
and
i
i
i. Thecompul
sionr
elat
est
ogi
vi
ngev
idence‘
agai
nsthi
msel
f.

(1)Accusedofanof f
ence:
Thewor ds‘
accusedofanof f
encemakesitcl
earit
sel
fonl
ythatt
hisRi
ghti
s
avai
labl
etoaper sonaccusedofanof
fenceonly
.

I
nacase, i
twashel
dthataper
son,whosenamewasment
ionedasanaccusedi
n
FI
Rbythepoli
ceandtheinv
est
igat
ionwasorder
edbyt
heMagist
rat
ecanclai
mthe
pr
otect
ionofthi
sRi
ght.
The2and3i ngr
edienti
.e.compulsi
ontobewit
nessandcompul
siont
ogive
evi
dence“agai
nsthimself
”,shal
lbetakent
oget
herasbot
hpoint
sconveysi
mil
ar
vi
ewpoint
/meaning.

Botht
heingredi
entscanbeunder
stoodt hroughthev
arioussect
ionsofI
ndi
an
Evi
denceAct,1872,whi
chst
atesasf ol
lows:
Accor
dingtoSec.25oftheActConfessionalSt
atement(Sel
fharming
st
atement
/stat
ementmadeagai
nsthi
msel
f)madebyaper
son/
accusedt
opol
i
ce
of
fi
ceri
sinadmissi
ble.

Accor
dingt
oSect
ion26,
suchconf
essi
onshal
lnotbepr
ovedagai
nsthi
m(accused)
.

Accordi
ngl
ytoSecti
on27“ whenaninformati
ongiv
enbyt heaccusedi
npoli
ce
cust
odyleadstodi
scoveryofani
ncriminati
ngmateri
alobject
,li
kej
ewel
ler
y,
weaponsetc.t
hatport
ionofthei
nformationcanbeproved.

ForExample:
Pistri
edformur der
,ifPinapolicecustodysays,“
Ihavekil
l
edQandburiedt
hedead
bodyinmygar den.Iwill
showy outheplace,whereIboi
ledthebody
� Accor
dingl
yif
Q'sbodyi
st r
acedout ,P'
sstat
ementi sadmissibl
eunderSec.27.

Nowonequesti
onher
ear
ises,whetherSecti
on27ofIndi
anevidenceActi
svi
olat
ive
ofAr
ti
cle20(
3)ofI
ndi
aConsti
tut
ion.Thisquest
ionwasresol
vedinacase[
1]

TheCourthel
dt hati
tisonthepr
osecuti
ontofi
ndoutwhethertheaccusedgavet
he
i
nformati
onvoluntar
il
yorcompulsor
il
y.TheCourtmadei
tclearthatSect
ion27of
theEvi
denceActisnotviol
ati
veofArt
icl
e20(3)
.

So,t
her efor
easperabov ementioneditisclearthat‘compulsiontobewi t
nessand
‘
compul siontogiveevidence“againsthi
msel f”bothstatesthattoattr
actthe
prot
ectionofAr t
icl
e20( 3)i
tmustbeshownt hattheaccusedwascompel ledto
maket hestatementlikelyt
obei ncri
minati
veofhi msel f
,wheretheaccusedmakesa
confessionwithoutanyinducement ,t
hreatorpr omise,Art
icl
e20( 3)doesnotappl
y.
Also,t
heterm‘ Wit
ness’i
ncludesboth,
OralanddocumentaryevidenceasheldinM.P.
Sharmav .Sati
shChandra.Asheldinthesamecase, however,
thereisnorest
ri
cti
on
whereasear chfordocumentorseizur
esisbeingdonebyt heauthori
ti
es.However,
theinf
ormationandev i
denceproducedvol
untari
lybytheaccusedispermissi
ble.
Letussupposet hattherei
ssomeMrJones,
whoisbeingtr
iedforanoffenceof
mur derofhisst
epbrotherandwhi
l
einpol
i
cecust
ody,hesaysthat“Ihav
eki l
l
edmy
stepbrother
”.
Samecoul dbeadmi ssibl
ei ncourtundersection27ofEv i
denceActanddoesn’ t
violat
eAr t
icl
e20( 3)
, butitisupont heprosecuti
ontof i
ndoutwhet herthe
i
nf ormat
ionpr ov
idedi svoluntaryorundercompul si
on.Therati
onalebehindt hi
sis
thattheev i
dencemustbei nt heform ofcommuni cat
ionandforthesamer easons,
themedi calexaminationdonedur ingthecourseofat ri
ali
spermi ssibl
e.Thi
si swhy
Nar coAnalysi
stestisf r
equent l
yusedbyaut horit
iest
ogatherinformationand
ev i
denceanddoesnotv i
olatetheprovisi
onunderAr t
icl
e20(3).
Arti
cle20(3)alsolay
soutthatapersoncannotbecompel ledt
obeawi tnessi
n
his/
herownpr osecuti
onorcase.Thi
sisalsoembodiedi ntheAmeri
canConstit
uti
on
byvirt
ueof5thAmendmenti ntoit
.Also,
theauthori
ti
escannotcompel theaccused
toproduceevidence,whi
chcanbeusedagai nsthi
stri
al.Thoseev
idencecanbeOr al
orDocumentary
.However
,anexcepti
ontothi
sli
esunderSect
ion91ofCrPCwhich
gi
vesauthor
ityt
oacourtoranoff
icert
oissueanor
derdemandingdocument
sthat
wereundert
hepossessi
onoftheaccused.
Anotherpr
ovisi
onwhi chguar
anteespr ohi
bit
ionagainstsel
f-i
ncr
iminat
ionisSecti
on
161(2)ofCrPC,whichsaysthatwhilebeingexami nedbytheauthori
ti
es,apersonis
boundtoanswerallthequesti
onst r
ulyexcepti
ngt hosewhichhaveapr opensi
tyt
o
beusedagainstthepersonhi
msel flat
erduri
ngt r
ial.

2.
3Pr
otect
ionofl
i
feandper
sonal
li
ber
ty(
Art
icl
e21)
Ar
ti
cle21r
eadsas:
Nopersonshal
lbedepri
vedofhi
sli
feorper
sonal
li
ber
tyexceptaccor
dingt
o
pr
ocedureest
abli
shedbylaw.

Thisr
ighthasbeenhel
dtobethehear
toftheConst
it
uti
on,themostor
gani
cand
progr
essiv
eprovi
sioni
nourl
iv
ingconst
it
uti
on,t
hefoundat
ionofourl
aws.

Arti
cle21canonlybecl aimedwhenaper sonisdepri
vedofhisli
feorper
sonal
l
ibert
ybytheStateasdef i
nedinArt
icle12.Violat
ionoftheri
ghtbypri
vat
e
i
ndivi
dualsi
snotwi thi
nt heprevi
ewofAr ticl
e21.
Arti
cle21usesthreecrucialexpr
essions,thoseareli
stedbel
ow:
1.Ri
ghtt
oli
fe,
and
2.Ri
ghtt
oper
sonal
li
ber
ty.
3.Pr
ocedur
eest
abl
i
shedbyl
aw
Meani
ngAndConceptofRi
ghtToLi
fe
Everyonei nthewor ldhast her i
ghtt olif
e,li
bertyandt hesecur it
yofper son.Thisi
s
theuniversal tr
uthint hewor l
dandt herighttolifeisundoubt edlythemost
fundament alofal lright
s.Al lotherrightsaddqual i
tytothelifeinquest ionand
dependont hepr e-existenceofl i
fei t
selffortheiroper at
ion.Ashumanr i
ghtscan
onlyattacht olivi
ngbei ngs, onemi ghtexpectt her ighttolif
ei t
selftobei nsome
sensepr i
mar y ,
sincenoneoft heot herrightswoul dnothav eanyv alueorut i
li
ty
withoutit.Therewoul dhav ebeennoFundament alRightswor thment ioningifArt
icl
e
21hadbeeni nter
pr etedinitsor i
ginalsense.Thi sAr ti
clewillexami nether i
ghttolif
e
asinterpretedandappl iedbyt heSupr emeCour tofIndia.

Arti
cle21appli
estonaturalper
sons.Theri
ghtisavail
abl
etoever
yper son,
cit
izenor
ali
en.Thus,ev
enaf or
eignercanclai
mt hi
sri
ght.I
t,however
,doesnotentit
lea
for
eignerther
ightt
oresideandset t
lei
nIndi
a,asment i
onedinArt
icl
e19.
ThescopeofArticl
e21wasabi tnarr
owt i
ll50sasitwasheldbyt heApexCour t
i
nA.K.GopalanvsStat
eofMadr asthatt
hecont ent
sandsubjectmat terofArti
cle21
and19(1)(d)arenoti
dent
icalandtheyproceedont ot
alpr
inci
ples.Inthiscasethe
worddepri
vati
onwasconstruedinanarrowsenseandi twasheldt hatthe
depr i
vationdoesnotr estri
ctupont her i
ghttomov ef r
eelywhichcameunderAr t
icl
e
19( 1)(d) .atthatti
meGopal anscasewast hel eadingcasei nr espectofAr ti
cle21
alongwi thsomeot herAr t
icl
esoft heConstitution,butpostGopal ancaset he
scenar i
oi nrespectofscopeofAr ti
cle21hasbeenexpandedormodi fi
edgraduall
y
throughdi f
ferentdecisionsoft heApexCour tandi twashel dthati nterf
erencewith
thef r
eedom ofaper sonathomeorr estr
ict
ioni mposedonaper sonwhi lei
njail
woul drequi reauthorit
yofl aw.Whet herthereasonabl enessofapenal l
awcanbe
exami nedwi thref
erencet oAr ti
cle19,wast hepoi ntinissueaf terGopal anscasein
thecaseofManekaGandhi v.UnionofIndia, theApexCour topenedupanew
dimensi onandl ai
ddownt hatt heprocedurecannotbear bitr
ary ,unfairor
unreasonabl eone.Ar t
icle21i mposedar estricti
onupont hestat ewher eit
prescribedapr oceduref ordepr i
vi
ngaper sonofhi sli
feorper sonal li
berty.

Thisv iewhasbeenf urt

herr elieduponi nacaseofFr ancisCor al
ieMul li
nv .The
Admi nist r
at or,UnionTer r
itoryofDel hi andot her sasf ol
lows:
Articl
e21r equi r
est hatnooneshal lbedepr ivedofhi slif
eorper sonal li
bertyexcept
bypr ocedur eest ablishedbyl awandt hisprocedur emustber easonabl e,fairandj ust
andnotar bitr
ar y,whi msicalorf anciful.Thel awofpr eventiv
edet enti
onhast herefore
nowt opasst het estnotonl yf orAr t
icl
e22, butal soofAr ti
cle21andi fthe
const i
tutional v al
idityofanysuchl awi schal l
enged, t
hecour twoul dhav et odeci de
whet hert hepr ocedur elaiddownbysuchl awf ordepr i
vingaper sonofhi sper sonal
l
iber t
yi sreasonabl e, f
airandj ust
.Inanot hercaseofOl gaTel lisandot her sv .
BombayMuni cipalCor porationandot hers, itwasf ur t
herobser ved: Justasamal a
fi
deacthasnoexi stencei nt heey eofl aw, ev enso, unreasonabl eness
vi
tiatesl awandpr ocedur eal ike.Iti
st hereforeessent i
althatt hepr ocedur e
prescribedbyl awf ordepr ivi
ngaper sonofhi sf undament alrightmustconf or mt he
normsofj usticeandf airplay .Procedur e,whi chi sjustorunf airi
nt heci r
cumst ances
ofacase, attr
act sthev i
ceofunr easonabl eness, therebyv it
iatingthel awwhi ch
prescribest hatpr ocedur eandconsequent ly, theact iontakenunderi t
Ri
ghtt
oli
fe
Everyciti
zenhast herighttoli
fe,l
i
berty,andsecurit
yofper son.Ther ighttoli
fei sthe
fundament alri
ghtintheIndianconsti
tution.Humanr i
ghtsareonl yattachedt olivi
ng
beings.Ther ightt
ol i
feisthemostv aluableri
ghtstociti
zens.Ther ewoul dhav e
beennoFundament alRi
ghts,worthment ioni
ngifArti
cle21hadbeeni nt
erpretedin
i
tsor i
ginalsense.Thisarti
cleexaminest heri
ghttoli
fewhi chisinterpretedbyt he
SupremeCour tofIndi
ai nnumerouscases.
Rightt
oli
f eisaf undament al
aspectoflifewithoutwhichwecannotl iv
easahuman
beingandi ti
ncludesal l
t hoseaspectsoflifewhichgot omakeahumanbei ng’
sli
fe
meaningful,complete,andwor t
hlivi
ng.Itisonlythearti
cleintheconsti
tut
ionthat
hasrecei
v edthewi destpossi bl
einter
pretati
on.UnderAr ti
cle21oftheIndian
Consti
tut
ion, t
her i
ghttoshel ter
,growth,andnour ishmentarement i
oned.Becauseit
i
st hebar
enecessi t
y,mi nimum andbasicr equir
ement sthatareessenti
aland
unavoi
dabl eforaper sonf ortheri
ghttolifeandot herr
ights.
I
nthecaseofKhar
akSi
nghv
.St
ateofUt
tarPr
adesh,
theSupr
emeCour
tquot
edand
heldthat:
Bythet ermli
feasher eusedsomet hingmor eismeantthanmer eanimalexi
stence.
Theinhibit
ionagainsti
tsdeprivati
onextendstoallt
hosel i
mbsandf acul
ti
esby
whichlifei
senjoyed.Thepr ovi
sionequallypr
ohibi
tsthemut il
ati
onofthebodyby
amput ati
onofanar moredlegort hepulli
ngoutofaney e,orthedest
ructi
onofany
otherorganofthebodyt hroughwhi chthesoulcommuni cateswitht
heouterworld.

Per
sonal
Liber
ty
Themeani ngoft heterm personal li
bertywasconsi deredbyt heSupremeCour tin
theKharakSi nghscase, whichar oseoutoft hechallengetoConst i
tuti
onalval
idi
tyof
theU.P.Pol i
ceRegul ati
onst hatprov i
dedforsurveil
lancebywayofdomi ci
l
iar
yv i
sit
s
andsecretpi cketing.Oddlyenoughbot hthemaj ori
tyandmi nori
tyonthebench
rel
iedont hemeani nggivent ot heterm per
sonal l
i
ber tybyanAmer i
canjudgment
(perFiel
d,J. ,
)inMunnvI ll
i
noi s,whichheldtheterml if
emeantsomet hingmoret han
mer eanimal exi
stence.Thepr ohi
biti
onagainsti
tsdepr i
vat
ionextendedtoallthose
l
imitsandf acult
iesbywhi cht helif
ewasenj oyed.

Thisprov i
sionequal lyprohibit
edthemut il
ati
onoft hebodyort heamput ationofan
arm orlegort heput tingofaney eort hedestruct i
onofanyot heror ganoft hebody
throughwhi cht hesoul communi catedwi t
htheout erwor ld.Themaj ori
tyheldt hat
theU.P.Pol i
ceRegul at
ionsauthori
zingdomi cili
aryv i
sit
s[ atnightbypol iceof f
icer
s
asaf orm ofsur v ei
l
lance,constit
utedadepr i
v ationoflibertyandt hus]
unconst i
tut
ional .TheCour tobservedthatther ighttoper sonal l
ibert
yint heIndian
Const i
tut
ioni sther i
ghtofani ndivi
dualtobef reef rom restri
ctionsor
encroachment sonhi sper son,whethertheyar edirectl
yimposedori ndir
ect l
y
broughtaboutbycal cul
atedmeasur es.necessar i
l
ylostasani ncidentof
i
mpr isonment .

TheSupremeCourthasheldt
hatev enl
awf ul
impri
sonmentdoesnotspel
lfarewel
l
toallf
undamental
right
s.Apr
isonerret
ainsallt
heri
ght
senjoyedbyafreecit
izen
exceptonl
ythose.
Pr
ocedur
eEst
abl
i
shedByLaw

Theexpressionprocedur eestabl
i
shedbylawhasbeent hesubjectmatterof
i
nterpret
ati
oni nacat enaofcases.Asurveyofthesecasesrevealsthatcourtsi
nthe
processofjudici
alinterpr
etat
ionhaveenl
argedthescopeoft heexpression.The
SupremeCour ttookt heviewthatpr
ocedureestabli
shedbylawi nArti
cle21means
procedureprescri
bedbyl awasenactedbyt hestateandrej
ectedt oequateitwi
th
theAmer i
canduepr ocessoflaw.

But,i
nManekaGandhi vUnionofI ndi
at heSupremeCour tobser
vedthatthe
procedur
eprescri
bedbylawf ordepri
v i
ngaper sonofhisli
feandpersonall
iber
ty
mustber i
ght
,justandfai
randnotar bit
rary,f
ancif
ulandoppressi
ve,other
wiseit
wouldbenopr ocedur
eatallandther equir
ementofAr t
icl
e21woul dnotbesatisf
ied.
Thus,t
heprocedureestabl
i
shedbylawhasacqui
redt
hesamesi
gni
fi
cancei
nIndi
a
asthedueprocessoflawclausei
nAmerica.
TheSupr emeCour thaswi denedthescopeofpr ocedur
eest abl
ishedbylawandheld
thatmer el
yapr ocedur ehasbeenest ablishedbyl awaper soncannotbedepr i
vedof
hisli
feandl i
bertyunlessthepr ocedureisj ust
,fairandreasonable.I
tisthusnow
wellestabli
shedt hattheprocedureest abli
shedbyl awtodepr iv
eaper sonofhisli
fe
andpersonal l
iberty,mustbej ust,f
airandr easonableandt hati
tmustnotbe
arbi
trar
y ,f
ancif
ul oroppressive,t
hatthepr ocedur etobev al
idmustcompl ywitht
he
pri
ncipl
esofnat ur al
justi
ce.

Ri
ghtt
oPr
ivacy
AsperBl acksLawDi ctionar y,pr i
vacymeansr i
ghttobel etalone; t
her i
ghtofa
persont obef reefrom unwar rant edpubl ici
ty;
andt herighttol ivewit
hout
unwar rantedi nter
ferencebyt hepubl i
ci nmat terswit
hwhi cht hepubli
ci snot
necessar il
yconcer ned.
Althoughnotspeci fical l
yr eferencedi nt heConst it
uti
on, therighttoprivacyis
consider edapenumbr alrightundert heConst i
tuti
on,i
.e.ar i
ghtt hathasbeen
declaredbyt heSupr emeCour tasi ntegral t
ot hefundament al ri
ghttolifeandl i
bert
y.
Rightt oprivacyhasbeencul l
edbyt heSupr emeCour tfrom Ar t.21andsev eralother
provisionsoft heconst itutionr eadwi tht heDirecti
vePrinciplesofSt atePolicy.
Althoughnosi ngl
est at uteconf ersacr osscuttinghori
zont alrighttoprivacy;vari
ous
statutescont ainprov isionst hatei t
herimpl ici
tl
yorexplicitl
ypr eservethisri
ght.

Forthefirstt
imeinKhar akSinghv .StateofU.Pquestionwhetherther i
ghttopriv
acy
coul
dbei mpli
edfrom theexisti
ngf undamental r
ight
ssuchasAr t.19(1)(
d),19(1)
(e)
and21, camebef orethecour t
.Surveil
lanceunderChapterXXoftheU. P.Police
Regulati
onsconst i
tut
edani nfri
ngementofanyoft hefundamentalri
ghtsguar ant
eed
byPar tI
IIoftheConstit
ution.Regulati
on236( b),
whichpermitt
edsur v
eill
anceby
domicili
aryvi
sitsatni
ght ,
washel dt obei nv
iolat
ionofArti
cle21.

Asev en-j
udgebenchhel dthat:
themeani ngsoftheexpressionsli
feandper sonall
ibert
yinArti
cle21wer e
consideredbythiscourti
nKhar akSinghscase.Al thoughthemaj or
ityfoundt hatthe
Constitut
ioncontai
nednoexpl ici
tguaranteeofar ighttopri
vacy,i
treadt herightto
personal l
i
bert
yexpansivel
yt oincl
udear i
ghtt odi
gnity
.Ithel
dthatanunaut hori
zed
i
ntrusionintoapersonshomeandt hedi sturbancecausedtohimt hereby,isasit
weret heviol
ati
onofacommonl awrightofaman- anult
imateessentialofordered
l
iberty,i
fnotoftheveryconceptofcivil
ization

2.
4Ri
ghtt
oEducat
ion(
Art
icl
e21A)
Ri
ghtt
oEducat
ion
Theri
ghttoeducati
onFlowsdir
ectl
yfrom t
herighttoLi
fe,andtheri
ghttoeducat
ion
bei
ngconcomi t
antt
othefundamentalri
ghts,
thestatei
sunderaCONSTI TUTIONAL
mandatetoprovi
deeducati
onali
nsti
tuti
onsatalll
evel
sforthebenefi
tsofthe
ci
ti
zens.
.

Mohi niJainv.St at
eofKar nataka,a1989Supr emeCour tofI ndiacase, occurred
whent heGov ernmentofKar natakissuedanot i
fi
cationthatper mittedthepr i
vate
medi calcoll
egesi ntheStateofKar nataktochar geexor bitanttuitionfeesf r
om the
studentsadmi t
tedotherthant he'Governmentseatquot a'.TheSupr emeCour tof
Indiobservedt hatmentionof' l
if
eandper sonal li
berty'i
nAr t
icl
e21oft he
Const i
tuti
on[1]automaticall
yimpl i
essomeot herrights,thosear enecessar yforthe
full
dev el
opmentoft hepersonalit
y ,
thought heyarenotenumer atedinPar tII
Iofthe
Const i
tuti
on.Educat i
onisonesuchf actorresponsibleforov eralldevelopmentofan
i
ndividualandt herefor
e,ri
ghtt oeducationisintegratedinAr ti
cle21oft he
Const i
tuti
on.

Expl
anat
ionofAr
ti
cle21ARi
ghtToEducat
ion
Art
icl
e21Aprov
isi
onmakesfreeandcompulsor
yonlyelementar
yeducat
iona
Fundament
alRi
ghtandnothi
gherorpr
ofessi
onaleducati
on.
Thi
sart
icl
eisnoti
n1949const
it
uti
on,
itwasaddedby86thConst
it
uti
onal
AmendmentActof2002.
Thisamendmenti
samaj
ormi
l
est
onei
nthecount
ry’
sai
mtoachi
eve‘
Educat
ionf
or
All
’
.
Thegover
nmentstat
edthi
sst
epas‘
Thedawnoft
hesecondr
evol
uti
oni
nthe
chapt
erofci
ti
zensri
ght
s’.

Backgr
ound
Evenbefor
ethi
samendmentPartIVoftheIndi
anConsti
tut
ion,
Art
icl
e45andArti
cle
39(f
)ofDPSP,hadapr
ovi
sionforstat
e-f
undedaswellasequit
abl
eandaccessi
ble
educat
ion.
Howev
er,
beingadir
ect
ivepri
nci
plei
twasnotenforceabl
ebythecourt
.Byaddi
ng
Ri
ghtt
oeducati
onasafundamental
right
,openst
hescopeforjudi
cial
int
erv
ent
ion.
Thefi
rstst
ept
owar
dRi
ghtt
oEducat
ionwasbyRamamur
tiCommi
tt
eeRepor
tin
1990.
I
nMohini
Jai
nvsSt at
eOfKar
nat
akaAndOrs,
1992casesupr
emecour tr
ecogni
zed
t
her
ightt
oeducat
ionasapar
tofArt
icl
e21Ri
ghtt
olif
eandpersonal
li
berty
.
SCmentionsthatwi
thouteducat
ionnoonecanbecomehuman.Buti
nthi
scase,
SC
notdeci
detheageforcompulsoryeducat
ion.
I
n1993,
int
hecaseofUnni
kri
shnanJPvsStat
eofAndhraPr
adesh&Other
st he
Supr
emeCour
t’
shel
dthatEducat
ioni
safundament
alr
ightf
lowi
ngf
rom Ar
ticle21.
Butbyconsi
der
ingdi
rect
ivepr
inci
plesofst
atepol
i
cyandf
inanci
alcondi
ti
onofst
ate
SCmadecompul
sor
yeducat
iononl
yfor6t
o14-
yearchi
l
dren.
M komonvsMani
purst
ateapr i
maryschoolshif
ti
ngcaseSChel
dthatgov
ernment
shoul
dal
soensur
ethereachabi
li
tyofschoolf
orchil
dren.
TapasMajumdarCommi
ttee(
1999)wassetup,
whichpl
edgedt
hei
nser
ti
onof
t
h
Art
icl
e21A.The86 Amendmentwasmadein2002.

86thConst
it
uti
onal
Amendment
AddnewAr
ti
cl
e21Ai
npar
t3ofconst
it
uti
on.
Itchangedthesubjectmatt
erofar
ticl
e45inthedi
rect
ivepr
inci
ple.I
tnowreads‘
The
stateshal
lendeavortoprov
ideear
lychil
dhoodcar
eandeducati
onf oral
lchi
l
dren
untilt
heycomplet
et heageofsixy
ears.’
I
talsoaddednewfundamental
dutyunderart
icl
e51Athatreads-
‘I
tshallbet
hedut
y
ofever
yciti
zenofI
ndi
atoprovi
deopportuni
ti
esforeducat
iontohischi
l
dorward
bet
weent heageofsi
xandfourt
eenyears.
’

2.
5Pr
otect
ionAgai
nstAr
restandDet
ent
ion(
Art
icl
e22)
Whati
sAr
ti
cle22?
Ar
ticl
e22gi
vespr
otect
ionagai
nstar
restanddet
ent
ioni
ncer
tai
ncases.I
tsf
eat
ures
ar
e:
 I
sappl
i
cabl
etobot
hci
ti
zenandnon-
cit
izens.
 Thi
sprovi
si
onext
endscer
tai
npr
ocedur
alsaf
eguar
dsf
ori
ndi
vi
dual
sincase
ofanarr
est.
 I
tcomesintothepict
ureaf
terapersonhasbeenar
rest
edi
tisnota
f
undamentalr
ightagai
nstdetent
ionandar
rest
.
 Thei
deabehi
ndt
her
ighti
stopr
eventar
bit
rar
yar
restanddet
ent
ion.
 TheAr
ti
cl
epr
ovi
desf
oll
owi
ngsaf
eguar
dsf
rom Ar
ti
cle22(
1to7)

“
Art
icl
e22–Pr
otect
ionagai
nstar
restanddet
ent
ioni
ncer
tai
ncases
(1)Nopersonwhoisarrest
edshallbedetai
nedi ncust
odywithoutbei
ngi
nfor
med,
assoonasmaybe, ofthegroundsforsucharrestnorshal
lhebedeniedt
heri
ghtt
o
consul
t,andtobedef
endedby ,al
egalpract
it
ionerofhischoi
ce”
Ar
ticl
e22(1)Anyper
sonwhoisincust
odymustbei
nfor
medast
owhyhehasbeen
ar
restedhehasther
ightt
oconsul
tanylawy
er.
“
(2)Ever
ypersonwhoi sarr
est
edanddetainedincustodyshal
lbeproducedbefore
t
henearestmagistr
atewit
hinaper
iodoftwentyfourhoursofsucharr
estexcludi
ng
t
hetimenecessaryfort
hejour
neyfrom t
heplaceofarrestt
othecourtofthe
magist
rateandnosuchper
sonshal
lbedet
ainedi
ncust
odybey
ondt
hesai
dper
iod
wi
thouttheauthor
it
yofamagi
str
ate.
”
Ar
ti
cle22(
2)Thearr
est
edindiv
idual
mustbepr
oducedbef
oreaj
udi
cial
magi
str
ate
wi
thi
n24hoursofhi
sar
rest.
“(
3)Nothinginclauses(1)and(2)shallappl
y(a)t
oanyper
sonwhof ortheti
me
bei
ngisanenemyal i
en;or(b)t
oanypersonwhoisarr
est
edordet
ainedunderany
l
awprovidingforprevent
ivedet
ent
ion.
”
Ar
ti
cle22(
3)Except
ionst
otheser
ulesar
eenemi
esandAl
i
ens.
“(
4)Nol awprovidi
ngforpreventiv
edetenti
onshallauthori
sethedetent
ionofa
personforalongerper
iodthant hreemonthsunless(a)anAdv i
soryBoard
consist
ingofpersonswhoare, orhavebeen,orarequalif
iedt
obeappoi ntedas,
JudgesofaHi ghCourthasrepor t
edbeforetheexpir
ationoft
hesai dperi
odofthree
mont hsthatt
hereisi
nitsopini
onsuf f
ici
entcauseforsuchdet ent
ion.
”
Ar
ti
cle22(4)Nolawprovi
despr
event
ivedet
enti
onforaperi
odnotmor
ethant
hree
months,
unlessanAdv
isor
yBoardofaquali
fi
edjudgeoft
heHighCour
t.
“(
5)Whenanyper sonisdetainedi
npursuanceofanordermadeunderanyl aw
prov
idi
ngforprev
entivedetenti
on,t
heauthori
tymakingt
heordershall,
assoonas
maybe,communi cat
et osuchpersonthegroundsonwhichtheorderhasbeen
madeandshallaffor
dhimt heearl
iestoppor
tuni
tyofmakingarepresentat
ion
agai
nsttheor
der.”
Arti
cle22(5)Thedet
ainedi
ndi
vi
dualshoul
dbeawar
eofthegroundsforhi
s
detenti
on.Alsobegi
venanopport
unit
yofmaki
ngarepr
esent
ationagai
nsthi
s/her
case.
“(6)Nothingi
nclause(5)shal lrequir
etheauthor
it
ymaki
nganysuchor
derasi
s
refer
redtointhatclauset odi
scl
osef actswhi
chsuchaut
hor
it
yconsi
der
stobe
againstthepubl
icinteresttodi
sclose.”
Ar
ti
cle22(
6)canst
opf
rom di
scl
osi
nganyf
acti
nint
erestofgener
alpubl
i
c

“
(7)Par
li
amentmaybyl
awpr
escr
ibe
(a)thecir
cumstancesunderwhi ch,andtheclassorclassesofcasesinwhich,
a
personmaybedet ainedforaper i
odlongerthanthreemont hsunderanyl
aw
providi
ngforpr
eventivedet
ent i
onwi t
houtobtaini
ngtheopi ni
onofanAdvi
soryBoar
d
i
naccor dancewit
ht heprovi
sionsofsubclause( a)ofclause(4);
(b)t
hemaximum peri
odforwhi
chanyper
sonmayi nanyclassorcl
assesofcases
bedetai
nedunderanyl
awprovi
dingf
orpr
event
ivedetent
ion;and
(
c)theprocedur
etobef ol
lowedbyanAdv isoryBoar
dinani
nqui
ryundersubcl
ause
(
a)ofclause(4)RightagainstExpl
oit
ati
on.”
Ar
ticl
e22(7)cl
ausehassubclausesa,b,
cwhereParli
amenthasasolepowerto
i
ncreaseordecr
easethedet
ainedperi
odabovet
hreemont hs.Al
sodeci
dethe
pr
ocedureforar
restanddet
enti
ongivenbyt
heAdvisoryBoard.

Whati
sdet
ent
ion?
Ther
ear
etwot
ypesofdet
ent
ions
 Puni
ti
ve
Puni
ti
vedet
ent
ioni
sadet
ent
ionaf
terat
ri
al.
 Pr
event
ive
Prevent
ivedet
ent
ioni
swithoutt
ri
al.Per
soncanbedetai
nedonl
yongroundsof
suspici
onhencet
heri
ghtsofapersonarrest
edi
nthi
smannergetsgover
nedby
prevent
ivedet
ent
ionl
aws.
Arti
cle22ofIndi
anConsti
tut
ionprovi
desprot
ect
ionagai
nstsuchar
restand
detenti
oninser
tincasesi
npreventi
ondet
enti
onunderSect
ion151oftheCri
minal
ProcedureCode1973.
Preventi
vedet enti
onisanacti
ontakenongroundsofsuspici
onsomewr ongacti
ons
maybedonebyt hepersonconcer
nedhenceaPol i
ceoffi
cercanarr
estanindi
vi
dual
withoutordersfrom afr
om magistr
atewi
thoutwarranti
fhegetsanyinf
ormati
onof
suchani ndiv
idualcannotcommitanyoff
ense.
Legal
prov
isi
ons
 Preventi
ondetent
ionisdef
inedunderSecti
on151oft heCri
minal Procedur
e
Codeof1973as“ anmeasureconductedont hebasi
sofsuspici
ont hatthe
personconcer
nedmaycommi tsomewr ongdoi
ng.”Art
icl
e22oft heIndian
consti
tut
ionpr
ohibit
sarr
estandcustodyincertai
ncir
cumstances.
 Accordi
ngtoSecti
on167oft heCri
mi nal
ProcedureCodeof1973, no
magistr
atecansancti
onthedetent
ionofanaccusedi npol i
cecust odyunt
il
theaccusedisbr
oughtbeforethemagistr
ateinperson.Thisprovision
prev
entstheaccusedfrom bei
ngheldonfalseorir
relevantcharges.

 Jogi
nderKumarVsSt
ateofUt
t adesh[3]–
arPr
Est
abl
i
shedst
andar
dreasonsf
orar
rest
ingany
one
Thecaseofestabl
ishedstandar
dr easonsforarr
esti
ngany
one;duri
ngthetri
alof
thi
scase,theApexCourtestabl
i
shedr ul
esforarrest
;asar
esult
,thi
scaseisknown
asthe“gui
deli
nesforarr
estcase.”Duetotheriseincri
merat
esandindiscr
iminat
e
arr
estsoverti
me,theSupremeCour tsoughttostri
keabal
ancebetweenthetwoin
thi
sdecisi
on.
[4]
 AhmedNoorMohammadBhat
tiVsSt
ateofGuj
arat –
Inthecaseofprev
enti
vedetent
ion,
theindi
vi
duali
sfr
eetoquer
ythereasonf
orhi
s
custody,
buttheoff
ici
alsmaydenyitonthegr
oundsofpubl
i
cint
erest
.
BecausetheclauseofthePr eventi
veDetenti
onActdidnott akeeffect
,thethree-
monthperiodissti
lli
neffect.TheSupremeCour tmaintaineditsconsti
tut
ional
l
egit
imacyin2005, i
nthiscase, wheretheSupremeCour tdecidedthattheabil
ity
underSecti
on151( v
)oftheCr P.C.toconvi
ctanindi
vidual wi
thoutevenaper mitis
nottr
ulyunconsti
tuti
onaljustbecausethepoli
ceoff
icermayabusehi spower .
Asar
esul
t,pr
event
ivedet
ent
ioni
sacr
uci
alt
ool
int
heExecut
ive’
sar
senal
.
Inthecaseofpr ev
enti
vedetenti
on,t
heindi
viduali
sfr
eetoquer
ythereasonforhi
s
custody,buttheoff
ici
alsmaydenyitonthegroundsofpubl
i
cint
erest
,leav
ingthe
off
icial
swi t
hplent
yofr oom t
oactarbi
tr
ari
ly
.
Art
icl
e22(3)oftheIndi
anConst
it
uti
onexpressl
yspeci
fi
esthatwhenapersonis
detai
nedunderprev
enti
vedet
ent
ionlegi
slat
ion,
heisnotent
it
ledt
otheprotect
ions
aff
ordedbyArti
cl
es22(1)and22(2).
[
5]
 D.
K.BasuVsSt
ateofWestBengal –
Deci
sionsagai
nstCust
odi
alDeat
hs
Thisisahistoricdecisi
onbyI ndi
a’
sSupremeCour ti
nthecontextofanincr
easing
numberofi n-custodydeaths.Theexecut
ivechai
rmanoflegalaidser
vicessenta
l
etterpr
otestingther i
si
ngnumberofcasesofcust odydeaths,whi
chthecourt
recogni
sedasawr i
tpeti
ti
onduet otheseri
ousnessofthesit
uati
on.
Inthisi
nstance,
theCourtf
oundthatt
helegi
slati
ondoesnotpr
ovi
deanadequat
e
system f
ordeali
ngwithcasesofcust
odi
aldeathsinI
ndia.
I
nits113t
hreport
,theI
ndianLawCommi ssi
onr ecommendedthatSect
ion114-B,
whi
chdealswit
hthesubjectofcust
odi
alvi
olence,bei
ncor
poratedi
ntotheIndi
an
Evi
denceAct
.
Custodi
aldeat
hisacausef orconcern,
accordi
ngt
othecourt,anditi
sevenworse
whenitiscommittedbyacitizen’
sguar
dian.Asar
esult
,thecourtr
uledt
hatt
his
conductisi
nviol
ationofAr
ticles21and22oftheI
ndianConstit
uti
on.
I
tisanobviousvi
olat
ionofthev i
cti
m’shumandi gnit
yandf undament
alri
ghts.Due
t
oal ackofevi
denceagainstpoli
ceoffi
cers,i
tcanbedi f
fi
culttopr
ovethei
rguil
t.
Duetothelackofconcr
eteev i
denceagainstthesepoli
cemen, t
heywereacquit
ted.
Thecour tal
sostatedthatusingthir
d-degreemethodsbypol i
cet ogetinfor
mation
fr
om theaccusedi sprohibi
tedandshoul dnotbeused,andt hatthemaj est
yofthe
l
awmustpr evai
l.Asar esul
t,t
hepolicehav et
herightt
oinvestigatethecaseand
questi
ont hesuspects,butt
heyar enotpermit
tedtousethird-degreetortur
eto
extr
actinformati
on.
TheCourtf
urt
herstat
edthatthegover
nmentmusti
mplementt
hesuggest
ionsmade
i
nthelawcommi ssi
onrepor
tinordert
ostopt
hesecri
mesagai
nsthumani
ty.

ThePr
event
iveDet
ent
ionAct
s
Ther
ehavebeenafewactsi
nhistor
ywhichhav
ebeenf
ramedbyl
awi
nor
dert
ofi
l
l
i
nthegapsandpr
ov i
depr
ovi
sionsofdet
enti
on.
Ter
ror
istandDi
srupt
iveAct
ivi
ti
es(
Prev
ent
ion)Act
,1987(
TADA)
Thislawwasant i
-terr
orism l
awwhi chgav ewi depowert ot heauthor i
ti
esf ordealing
withnational t
errorism andsociall
ydisrupti
veactivi
ties.ThisActpr ovidedt hata
personcanbedet ainedupt o1y earwithoutformalchar gesort ri
al.Adet aineecan
beincust odyupt o60day swi t
houtbei ngproducedi nf r
ontofamagi stratebut
i
nsteadmay beproducedt oexecut i
vemagi str
atewhoi snotanswer abletohi gh
court.ThisActal l
owedt heauthorit
iestowithholdthei denti
tiesofwi t
nessesand
secrettr
ials.Thepol i
ceweregi venenhancedpower sfordet enti
onofsuspect sand
theActshi ftedthebur denofpr oofontheaccusedwhi chledt oabuseoft hisActand
adverseef fectont hedemocr acyoft hecountry.ThisActi snowr epeal ed.
Nat
ional
Secur
it
yAct
,1980
Thepur poseoft hisActwast opr ov idef orpreventiv edet ent
ionl awsandmat t
ers
connectedt herewi th.Theaut hor i
ties, t
hrought hisAct ,
obt ai
nt hepowert odetain
anypersonwhoposesat hreatt ot hesecur i
tyoft henat i
oninanypr ejudici
almanner .
Theycanal sodet ainanyf oreignerandr egulatethei rpresencei nt hecount ry.Under
thi
sActani ndividual canbedet ainedwi thoutachar gef orupt o12mont hsi
ft he
authori
tiesar esatisfiedthattheper soni sat hreatt onat ionalsecur i
ty.Thedet enu
canneitheri mposecompul sionf orknowi ngt hegr oundsofdet ent ionnorcangeta
l
awy erdur i
ngt het ri
al.TheNSAhasr epeatedlycomeundercr it
icism f orthewayi tis
usedbyt hepolice.TheActdi ffersf rom nor mal det enti
onasi tabrogat esallr
ights
avail
ablet othedet enui nnor mal circumst ances.
Pr
event
ionofTer
ror
ism Act(
POTA)
,2002
ThisActaimedatstrengtheninganti
-terror
ism l
awsinIndia.ThisActreplacedTADA.
Itdefi
nedwhatacti
viti
escoul dconsti
tuteat er
rori
stactandwhoat er
rori
stwas.I n
ordertoensurenovi
olationofhumanr ightsandmisuseofpower ,cert
ain
safeguardswereal
soi nstal
ledwithi
nt heAct.Theprovisi
onswer eall
simi l
artothe
onespr ovi
dedinTADA.Ri ghtaft
ertheenact mentofthisActitwasallegedt hatt
his
l
awwasgr ossl
yabused, hencerepeali
ngi taft
ertwoshortyears.

MODULE3
3.
1Ri
ghtAgai
nstExpl
oit
ati
on(
Art
icl
e23-
24)
ARTI
CLE23
Art
icl
e23(1)stat
estheprohibi
ti
onoft r
aff
ici
nhumanbei ngs,begarandothersimi
lar
for
msoff or
cedlabourandanybr eachofthi
sprovi
sioni
spunishableunderlaw.This
art
icl
enotonlyprot
ect
sani ndi
vidualagai
nstthest
atebutalsoagainstpr
ivate
ci
ti
zens.Thi
sar
ti
cl
eincl
udedt
hreeunsoci
alpr
act
icesi
.e.
,

a.Beggar
b.Tr
aff
ici
nhumanbei
ngs
c.For
cedl
abour
.
Meani
ngAndConcept
s:
1.Beggar
:Itmeansi
nvol
unt
arywor
kwi
thoutPay
ment
.

a.Thi
ster
misusedwher
eaper
soni
scompel
l
edt
owor
kagai
nsthi
swi
l
l,
b.Aper
soni
sal
sonotpai
danyr
emuner
ati
onf
ort
hatwor
k.
Itmeansaper sonwhoi sinpowerwi thoutgi
vingremunerat
ionfori
toraser vi
ce
exactedbythegov ernment .Therefor
e,thi
spracti
cewasabol i
shedthroughArti
cle
23(1)butwaswi delyprevalentinthePrincel
yStatesofI
ndiabefor
et headventofthe
Constit
uti
on.
2.Traff
icinHumanBeings: Thi
stermisusuall
yusedforbuyi
ngandsel li
ng
humanbei ngscommonl yknownassl av
eryasi
ftheyarechatt
els.Thisart
icl
e
al
soi ncl
udedthetr
aff
ickingofwomenf orimmoralpur
poses.Therefore,
such
pract
icesareconst
it
utional
lyabol
ished.

3.Forcedlabour
:Inart
icl
e23(1)thewords'othersimil
arform offor
cedl abour
'is
i
nterpr
etedast heej
usdem generi
s.Thi
sf orcedlabourhastober el
atedto
somethingwiththenatur
eofeithert
raf
fi
ckingi nhumanbei ngsorbegar .

Si
mil
arFor
msOfFor
cedLabour
:
Forinstance,BondedLabori sf or
cedlabour
.TheStateshallensur
et hatthe
fundament alri
ghtsofpeoplewhohav ebeencomplai
ni ngoftheviol
ationarenot
viol
atedandst ri
ctl
ypr ot
ectediftheyareoftheweakpar tofhumanityandarenot
will
ingtofightagainstastrongandi nf
luent
ial
opponentwhoexpl oit
st hem.Itshal
l
alsoguaranteethatpr i
vat
eci t
izenscomplywitht
hepr ovisi
onsofthelaw.
I
nthecasenamed, PeoplesUnionforDemocr at
icRightsvUnionofIndi
a[8]the
Supr
emeCour truledthat,i
nwhateverwayt hati
tmi ghtmanif
estit
self
,Arti
cle23(1)
muststr
ikeatforcedlabour.Ther
efore,
itnotonlyprohibi
tedbegarbutal
sof or
bade
al
lunwil
li
nglabour,whetherpaidorunpaid.Ifl
abourisimposeduponani ndivi
dual,
anyremunerat
ionpaidtot hatper
sonwoul dbeirrel
evant.
Compul
sor
yser
vicesf
orpubl
i
cpur
poses[
Art
icl
e23(
2)]
:
Ar
ti
cle23(2)isanexcept
ionforclause(1)oftheart
icl
e,whichenablesthestatet
o
i
mposecompul soryser
vicesforpubli
cservi
ces.However,t
hest at
eisprohibi
tedto
makeanydiscri
minati
onont hegroundofreli
gion,
sex,cast
e,class,oranyofthem,
whi
leimposingthecompulsoryservi
cesforpubli
cpurposes.

Thet er
m" publ
icpurpose"cov er
sanycauseorobject
iveexpressl
yandessential
l
y
concernedwiththegener al
inter
estofthesoci
etyasopposedt ot
hepersonal
i
nterestoftheindi
vi
dual[10].Thatwi
llcont
aint
hesocialoreconomicobject
ivesof
PartIVoftheConstitut
ionrelati
ngtotheDir
ect
ivePri
ncipl
esofStatePoli
cy.
Forinstance,inthecasenamed, DevendraNat hGuptav .St
ateofM.P[ 11]
.,Madhya
PradeshHi ghCour thel
dthatiti
snotcont radi
ctor
ytoAr ti
cle23thatt
heser vi
ce
requir
edt obeper for
medbyt eachersfor"publ
icpurposes"wast obepr ov
idedfor
educationalsurveys,f
orfamil
yplanning,f
orprepari
ngt hevoter
s'li
st,
forgeneral
elect
ions,heterogeneous.

Inanothercasenamed,St
ateofH.P.v
.Jarawa[12],
itwashel
dthatthecompulsory
servi
cewhichmaybei mposedbythestat
ef orpubl
icpur
posesunderclause(
2)of
Art
icl
e23shal lbehel
dint
heexist
enceforthedefenceandsoci
alservi
cesofthe
countr
y.
ARTI
CLE24
Thearti
clest
atesthat'
nochil
dshal
lbeempl
oyedtowor
kinafactoryormineor
engagedinanyotherhazar
dousemploy
mentbel
owtheageoffourt
eenyears[
18]
'
.

Art
icl
e24readwi
thDPSPcont
ainedinArti
cles39(
e)and39(
f),
prot
ect
stheheal
thof
chi
ldr
enbelowt
heageoff
ourt
eeny ear
s[19]
.
Thepr ohibiti
onment ionunderAr t
icl
e24oft heIndianConstitut
ionisenfor
ced
againstev eryone,whetheritsstat
eorprivat
einduv ial
.Int
hecasenamed, Peopl
es
Unionf orDemocr ati
cRi ghtsv.UnionofIndi
a[20],thesupremecour theldt
hatthe
constructionofabui ldi
ngi shazar
dousempl oymentwher echi l
drenbelowtheageof
fourt
eeny earsshouldnotbeempl oy
ed.
Indi
abei ngt hefederalfor
m ofgov er
nment ,
botht hecentralgovernmentandthe
stat
egov ernmentcanl egislat
ethematterofchildlabour.
Cer
tai
nactsweremadef ort
hepr ot
ecti
onofchi
l
dlabourwhichisasfoll
ow:
TheMinesActof1952:Thechil
drenbel
owtheageof18y earswereprohi
bit
edf
rom
doi
ngworkinami neundert
hisact.

TheChi ldLabour(Pr ohibit

ionandRegul ation)Actof1986: Thechildr
enbel owthe
ageof14y earswer epr ohibit
edf r
om doingwor ki
nahazar dousoccupationwhich
wasi denti
fi
edinal istbyl aw.Fur t
her,t
hel i
stwasexpandedi n2006and2008.I n
2006, underthi
spr ovision,theageoft hechi l
drenwasal sochangedthroughv ari
ous
actsliketheMi ni
mum WagesAct1948, thePl antat
ionsLabourAct1951, the
Mer chantShippingAct1958, andt heMot orTransportWor kersAct1961.The
governmentor deredabanont heemploymentofchi l
drenasser v
antsont he
recommendat i
onsoft heTechni calAdvi
sor yCommi ttee.Furt
her,
in2008, t
his
pr
ovi
si
onpr
ohi
bit
edchi
l
dlabouri
nahazar
dousoccupat
ion.

TheJuveni
leJusti
ce(Car
eandProtect
ion)ofChi
l
drenActof2000:Anyactmade
undert
hisprovi
si
onwasconsider
edacr i
me,puni
shabl
ewithatermifanyone
employ
sachi l
dinanyhazar
dousemployment.

TheRightofChildr
entoFreeandCompulsoryEducationActof2009:Thi
sactgave
theri
ghttothechil
drent
ohav ef
reeandcompul soryeducati
onagedbetween6to14
year
s[21]
.Also,25%ofseatswereal
locatedforthechil
dreni
nprivat
eschool
swho
arephysi
cal
lychall
engedandthosefrom di
sadvantagedgroups.

3.
2Ri
ghtt
oFr
eedom ofRel
i
gion(
Art
icl
es25–28)
Whati
sSecul
ari
sm?
Seculari
sm meansdev eloping,understandingandr espectf ordiff
erentrel
i
gions.Iti
s
beli
evedt hatt hewor d‘Seculari
sm’ hasitsorigini nlatemedi evalEurope.I
n1948,
duri
ngt heconst i
tuentassembl ydebate, ademandwasmadebyt heKTShaht o
i
ncludet hewor d‘Secular’
inthePr eambl etotheConst i
tut
ion.Themember softhe
assembl yt houghagr eedtot hesecularnat ur
eoft heconst i
tuti
onbuti twasnot
i
ncorpor atedint hePreambl e.Later,i
n1976t heI ndiraGandhi gov er
nmentenact ed
the42ndAmendmentActandt hewor d‘Secul ar’wasaddedt ot hePreamble.The
42ndAmendmentActal soknownast he‘ Mini Const i
tut
ion’,i
sthemost
compr ehensi veamendmentt otheConst i
tuti
on.
S.R.Bommai
v.Uni
onofI
ndi
a,AI
R1994SC1918
The9j udgebench, inthiscase, ruledt hatSecularism i
st hebasicfeatureofthe
Const i
tut i
onofI ndi
a.Italsoobser v edt hatrel
igi
onandpol i
ti
cscannotbemi xed
together .I
ftheSt at
efollowsunsecul arpol i
ciesorcour sesofactiontheni tacts
contraryt otheconst i
tuti
onal mandat e.InaSt ate,al
lareequalandshoul dbet r
eat
ed
equally.Rel i
gionhasnopl aceinthemat ter
sofSt ate.Freedom ofreli
gionasa
fundament alrighti
sguar anteedt oall personsinIndiabutf r
om thepoi ntofviewof
theStat e,reli
gion,f
ait
h,andbel iefar eimmat eri
al.
Fr
eedom ofRel
i
gioni
nIndi
a(Ar
t.25t
o28)
Ar
ti
cle25
Freedom ofconsci enceandf r
eepr ofession,practi
ceandpropagat i
onofr eli
gion
(1)Subjecttopubl i
cor der,mor al
ityandheal t
handt otheotherprovisionsoft his
Part,al
lpersonsar eequal l
yent it
ledt ofreedom ofconscienceandt her ightfreelyto
profess,pract
iseandpr opagater eli
gion
(2)Nothingint hisar
ticleshallaffectt heoper ati
onofanyexisti
nglaworpr eventthe
Statefrom maki nganyl aw
(a)regulat
ingorr est
ricti
nganyeconomi c,fi
nancial,
pol
iti
calorothersecul aractivi
ty
whichmaybeassoci atedwi t
hr eli
giouspr act
ice;
(b)providi
ngforsoci alwelfareandr eform ort hethr
owingopenofHi ndur eli
gious
i
nstitut
ionsofapubl icchar actertoal lclassesandsect i
onsofHi ndus
Ar
ticl
e25oft heConst
it
uti
onguaranteesfreedom ofrel
i
giontoallper
sonsinI
ndi
a.I
t
pr
ov i
desthatal
lper
sonsinIndi
a,subjectt
opublicorder
,morali
ty,
healt
h,andot
her
pr
ov i
si
ons:
 Ar
eequal
l
yent
it
ledt
ofr
eedom ofconsci
ence,
and
 Hav
ether
ightt
ofr
eel
ypr
ofess,
pract
iceandpr
opagat
erel
i
gion.
I
tfur
therprov
idest
hatt
hisar
ti
cleshal
lnotaff
ectanyexi
sti
ngl
awandshal
lnot
pr
eventthestat
efr
om maki
nganylawrelat
ingto:
 Regul
ati
onorrestri
cti
onofanyeconomic,
financi
al,
pol
i
tical
,oranysecul
ar
act
ivi
tyassoci
atedwithr
eli
giouspr
act
ice.
 Pr
ovi
dingsoci
alwel
far
eandr
efor
m.
 Openi
ngofHindurel
i
giousi
nst
it
uti
onsofpubl
i
cchar
act
erf
oral
lthecl
asses
andsect
ionsoft
heHindus.
I
nthecaseofSPMi t
talv.Uni
onofIndi
a,t
hecourthel
dt hatRel
i
gionneednotbe
t
heist
ic.I
tisnotmer
elyanopini
on,
doctri
neorbel
iefbuthasanoutwardexpr
essi
on
i
ntheactaswel l
.
TheNat
ional
Ant
hem Case
Bi
j
oeEmmanuel
v.St
ateofKer
ala,
(Popul
arl
yknownast
henat
ional
ant
hem case.
)
Thef actsoft hi
scasewer et hatthreechi l
dr enbel ongingtoasect( Jehovah’s
witness)wor shippedonlyJehov ah( thecr eator)andr efusedt osingt henati
onal
anthem “JanaGanaMana” .Accor dingtot hese, childrensingingJanaGanaMana
wasagai nstthet enet
soft heirreli
giousf aithwhi chdi dnotal l
owt hem tosingthe
nationalanthem.Thesechi ldrenst oodupr espect full
yinsilencedai l
yforthenati
onal
anthem butr efusedtosingbecauseoft hei rhonestbel i
ef.ACommi ssi
onwas
appointedtoenqui reaboutt hemat t
er.Int herepor t,t
heCommi ssionstat
edt hat
thesechildrenwer e‘l
aw-abiding’anddi dnotshowanydi srespect .However,the
headmi str
essundert heinstructionoft heDy .InspectorofSchool sexpell
edthe
students.
TheSupr emeCourtheldt hattheact i
onoft heheadmistressofexpelli
ngt hechil
dren
from school f
ornotsingingt henational anthem wasv i
olati
veoftheirfreedom of
reli
gion.Thefundament alrightsguarant eedunderAr t
icl
e19( 1)(
a)andAr t
icl
e25(1)
hasbeeni nf
ri
nged.Itfur
therhel dthatt hereisnoprovisi
onofl awwhi chcompel sor
obli
gat esanyonetosingt henat i
onal anthem, i
tisalsonotdisrespectfulifaperson
respect f
ull
ystandsbutdoesnotsi ngt henat i
onalanthem.

Ar
ti
cle26
Freedom tomanagereli
giousaffai
rsSubj
ecttopubli
corder,
mor al
i
tyandhealt
h,
everyrel
i
giousdenominationoranysecti
onther
eofshallhav
etheright
(a)toestabl
i
shandmai ntaini
nstit
uti
onsforr
eli
giousandchari
tabl
epurposes;
(
b)t
omanageit
sownaffai
rsi
nmat t
ersofreli
gion;
(
c)t
oownandacquir
emovableandimmov abl
epr oper
ty;
and
(
d)t
oadmi
nist
ersuchpr
opert
yinaccordancewithlaw.
Rel
i
giousdenomi
nat
ion
Theword‘reli
giousdenomi nati
on’ i
snotdefinedi
ntheconstit
ution.Thewor d
‘
denomination’camet obeconsi deredbytheSupremeCour ti
nt hecase
ofCommi ssioner,
HinduRel i
giousendowmentMadr asv.ShriLaxmi ndraThir
tha
SwamiarofShr iShir
urMut t
.Inthiscase,themeaningof‘Denomi nation’wascull
ed
outfr
om theOxf orddicti
onary
, “
Acol l
ect
ionofindiv
idual
sclassedt ogetherunder
thesamename, areli
gioussectorbodyhav ingacommonf ai
thandor gani
zati
on
desi
gnatedbyadi sti
nctivename” .
Br
amchar
iSi
dheshwarBhai
v.St
ateofWestBengal
Inthi
scase, TheRam Kr i
shnaMi ssionwant edt odecl areit
selfasanon-Hi ndu
minori
tywher ei t
smember swer etobet r
eat edasHi ndusint hemat terofmar ri
age
andinheri
tancebuti nther el
igi
oussenset ober ecognizedasnon- Hindus.Thi s
wouldcertai
nl ymeant hattheyar egiventhest atusofl egal Hi
ndusbutr el
igiousnon-
Hindus,si
milart oSikhsandBuddhi sts.Tot his,theSupr emeCour truledthati t
cannotbeclai medbyt hefollowersofRam Kr ishnathatt heybelongt ot hemi norit
y
oftheRam Kr ishnaReligi
on.Ram Kr i
shnaRel igi
oni snotdi sti
nctandsepar atefrom
theHindureligion.I
tisnotami nori
tybaseduponr el
igion.Hence, i
tcannotcl ai
mt he
fundamental ri
ghtunderAr ti
cle30( 1)toestabl i
shandadmi ni
sterinstit
uti
onsof
educati
onbyRam Kr i
shnaMi ssion.
Li
mit
ati
onoft
heRi
ght
Therighttorel
i
gionunderAr t
icl
e26i ssubj
ecttocertai
nlimi
tati
onsandnotabsolut
e
andunf et
ter
ed.Ifanyrel
igi
ouspracti
ceisincontravent
iontoanypubli
corder
,
moralit
yorhealt
ht hensuchreli
giouspract
icecannotclai
mt heprot
ect
ionofthe
stat
e.
Ar
ti
cle27
Freedom ast opaymentoftaxesforpromotionofanypart
icul
arrel
i
gionNoperson
shallbecompel l
edtopayanyt axes,
theproceedsofwhicharespecif
ical
l
y
appropriat
edinpaymentofexpensesf orthepromoti
onormai nt
enanceofany
parti
cularrel
i
gionorrel
i
gionsdenomi nat
ion.
InthecaseofCommi ssi
oner,
HinduRel i
giousEndowment s,Madrasv .Sri
LakshmindraThirt
haSwami arofSriShir
urMut t
,theMadr aslegi
slat
ureenact edthe
MadrasHi nduReli
giousandCharit
ableEndowmentAct ,1951andcont ri
butions
werelevi
edundert heAct.I
twascont endedbythepet i
ti
onerthatthecont r
ibuti
ons
l
eviedaretaxesandnotaf eeandthest ateofmadrasisnotcompet entt oenact
suchapr ovi
sion.I
twasheldbytheSupr emeCour tthatthoughthecont r
ibution
l
evi
edwastaxbutt
heobj
ectofi
twasf
ort
hepr
operadmi
nist
rat
ionoft
her
eli
gious
i
nst
it
uti
on.
Ar
ti
cle28
Freedom ast oattendanceatr eli
giousinstr
uct i
onorr el
igiouswor shipi ncertai
n
educat ional insti
tutions
(1)Nor eli
gi oninst r
uct i
onshal lbepr ovi
dedi nanyeducat ional i
nst i
tutionwhol l
y
mai ntainedoutofSt at efunds
(2)Not hingi nclause(1)shal lapplytoaneducat ionalinsti
tutionwhi chi s
admi nister edbyt heSt atebuthasbeenest ablishedunderanyendowmentort rust
whichr equi resthatr eli
giousinstructi
onshal lbei mpar t
edi nsuchi nstituti
on
(3)Noper sonat tendi nganyeducat i
onalinsti
tutionr ecognizedbyt heSt ateor
receivingai doutofSt atefundsshal lberequi r
edt ot akepar tinanyr eli
gious
i
nstr uctiont hatmaybei mpartedinsuchi nstit
utionort oat tendanyr eligious
wor shipt hatmaybeconduct edi nsuchi nstit
utionori nanypr emi sesat tached
theretounl esssuchper sonor, i
fsuchper soni sami nor,hisguar dianhasgi venhis
consentt her etoCul t
ur alandEducat ionalRights.
Teachi
ngofGur
u-Nanak:
D.A.
V.Col
l
egev
.St
ateofPunj
ab,
(1971)2SCC368
I
nt hi
scase,Secti
on4oft heGuruNanakUni versit
y(Amr i
tsar)Act,1969whi ch
provi
dedthatthestateshal
lmakeprovisionsf orthestudyofl i
feandt eachi
ngsof
GuruNanakDev jiwasquesti
onedasbei ngv i
olativ
eofAr ti
cle28oft heConst it
uti
on.
Thequestionthatarosewasthatt
heGur uNanakUni v
ersityiswhollymaintainedout
ofstat
efundsandSect ion4inf
ri
ngesAr ti
cle28.Thecour tr ej
ectingthishel
dt hat
Secti
on4pr ovi
desfortheacademicstudyoft hel i
feandt eachingsofGur uNanak
andthiscannotbeconsider
edasr el
i
giousi nstructi
on.
Educati
onforv
aluedev
elopmentbasedonal
lrel
i
gions:
ArunaRoyv
.Uni
onofI
ndi
a,
(2002)7SCC368.
Inthiscase,aPI Lwasf i
ledunderArti
cle32wher eini twascont endedbyt he
petit
ionerthattheNat ionalCurri
cul
um Framewor kf orSchool Education(NCFSE)
whichwaspubl i
shedbyt heNat i
onalCouncilofEducat i
onal ResearchandTr aini
ngis
viol
ativeofthepr ovi
sionsoft heconsti
tuti
on.Itwasal socont endedt hatitwasant i
-
secularandwasal sowi thouttheconsult
ationoftheCent ralAdv i
soryBoar dof
Educat i
onandhencei tshoul dbesetaside.NCFSEpr ov i
dededucat ionforv alue
developmentr elati
ngt obasichumanv alues,soci
al justice,non-viol
ence, self-
disci
pline,
compassi on,etc.Thecourtrul
edt hatt
her ei snov iol
ationofAr ticle28
andt herei
sal sonopr ohi bi
ti
ontostudyreli
giousphi l
osophyf orhav i
ngv alue- based
l
ifeinasoci et
y .
Ar
ti
cle29–Pr
otect
ionofI
nter
est
sofMi
nor
it
ies
Thi
sar
ti
clei
sint
endedt
opr
otectt
hei
nter
est
sofmi
nor
it
ygr
oups.
Arti
cle29(1):Thi
sprovidesanysect
ionofthecit
izensresi
dingi
nIndi
ahavinga
dist
inctcult
ure,l
anguage,orscr
ipt
,ther
ighttoconserv
et hei
rcul
tur
e,l
anguageand
scri
pt.
Art
icl
e29( 2)
: TheSt ateshal
lnotdenyadmissi
onint
oeducati
onali
nst
it
utes
maintai
nedbyi tort hosethatr
eceiv
eaidfr
om itt
oanypersonbasedonlyonr
ace,
rel
i
gion,caste,language,oranyofthem.

Topr
eser
vel
anguage,
scr
ipt
,andcul
tur
e
Ar
ti
cle29(
1)extendstoall
thecit
izensir
respecti
veofthefactwhet
hert
heyar
ein
major
it
yorminori
ty,
theonlycondit
ionbeingthatsuchsecti
onmusthaveadi
sti
nct
l
anguage,
scr
iptorcult
ureofit
sown.
I sanabsol
ti uteri
ghtfortheminor
it
iest
opreser
veitslanguageandcult
urethr
ough
educati
onali
nsti
tut
ionsandcannotbesubj
ecttoreasonablerest
ri
cti
onsint
he
i
nterestoft
hegeneralpubli
c.
Rest
ri
cti
onsont
hegr
oundofr
eli
gion,
race,
cast
eorl
anguage
Arti
cle29(2)isani ndiv
idualri
ghtgivent ociti
zenandnott oanycommuni ty.The
presentclausegivesanaggr ievedper son,whohasbeendeni edadmi ssi
onont he
groundofhi srel
i
gion.I fapersonhast heacademicqualif
icat
ionsbutisrefused
admi ononl
ssi yont hegroundsofr el
igion,r
ace,caste,
languageoranyoft hem, t
hen
thereisaclearbreachoft hef undament alr
ightunderthi
ssection.
Ar
ti
cle30–Ri
ghtofMi
nor
it
iest
oEst
abl
i
shandAdmi
nist
erEducat
ional
Inst
it
uti
ons
Thi
srighti
sgi
vent
omi nori
ti
estofor
m andgov er
nthei
rowneducat
ional
inst
it
uti
ons.
Art
icl
e30isal
socal
ledthe“Char
terofEducat
ionRight
s”.
Art
icl
e30(1):Al
lrel
igi
ousandlingui
sti
cminori
ti
eshavet
herightt
oestabl
i
shand
admini
stereducati
onali
nsti
tut
ionsofthei
rchoi
ce.(
ReadaboutMinor
it
yProt
ect
ion
i
nIndiai
nt heli
nkedart
icl
e.)
Ar
ticl
e30(2):
TheStateshal
lnot
, whengrant
ingaidt oeducat
ionali
nsti
tut
ions,
di
scri
minateagai
nstanyeducat
ionali
nsti
tut
ionont hegroundthati
tisunderthe
managementofami nor
it
y,whetherbasedonrel
igionorlanguage.
Ri
ghtt
oest
abl
i
sh
Tocl
aimt
hebenef
itunderar
ti
cle30(
1)i
tisnotnecessar
y-
1.Thattheinsti
tut
ionmustseekt oconservethelanguage,scr
iptorcul
tur
eof
theminorit
ycommuni ty;whatisnecessaryisit
sestabl
ishmentbythe
minori
tycommuni ty,i
tmayimpar trel
i
giousorseculareducati
onwholly
unconnectedwithlanguage,scri
pt,
andcul t
ure.
2.Thatadmi
ssi
oni
ntosuchinsti
tut
ionmustbeconfinedexcl
usi
vel
yto
membersoft
heminori
tycommuni t
y,andnotasinglememberofthemaj
ori
ty
communit
yorot
herminori
tycommuni t
iesshoul
dhav ei
tsadv
antage.
Al
i
gar
hMusl
i
m Uni
ver
sit
y(AMU){
AzeezBashav
.Uni
onofI
ndi
a}
InthecaseofAzeezBashav .Uni
onofI ndia7,theSupremeCour theldthati
fan
educationalinstit
uti
onisnotbeenest ablishedbythemi nori
tycommuni tyt
henthey
havenor ighttoadmi nisterit.Theterm“ establ
i
shed”and“ admini
stered”havet
obe
readincoor dinati
on.TheUni ver
sityGrantsCommi ssi
onActpr ohibi
tsthe
formulati
onof“ Univ
ersit
y ”establ
ishedbyt heeducati
onal i
nsti
tut
ionunlessandunti
l
i
tisgov ernedbyl aw.

Admi
ssi
onPr
ocedur
einMi
nor
it
yEducat
ional
Inst
it
uti
on
InSt.St
ephen’
sColl
egev.Uni
versi
tyofDel
hi14,
thepr
efer
encei
sgi
vent
oChr
ist
ian
student
sbySt.
Stephen’
sColl
egewaschall
enged.
TheSupr emeCour tbyt hemaj orit
yof1t o4heldthatthecollegeisnotboundt o
foll
owt heuniver
sit
ycircul arsasi twilldepri
vethecoll
egeoft heirminori
tycharacter.
Ther i
ghttoselectstudent sforadmi ssionisanimportantfacetofadmi ni
str
ation.
Thispoweral socanber egulatedbutt heregul
ati
onmustber easonableandshoul d
beconduci vetothemi nor i
tyinstit
utions.Theimpugneddi recti
veoftheuniversit
yt o
selectstudentsontheuni f
orm basi sofmar kssecuredinthequal i
fyi
ng
exami nati
onswoulddenyt herighttot hecoll
egetoadmi tstudentsbelongi
ngt othe
Christ
iancommuni ty.Unl esssomeconcessi onisprovi
dedt otheChr i
sti
an
students15
Thecour
tdeci
dedt
het
wocat
egor
iesf
ort
hesel
ect
ionpr
ocess:
1.Cat
egor
yI–50%oft
heseat
sreser
vedf
ort
hemi
nor
it
ycommuni
ty.
2.Cat
egor
yII–r
emai
ning50%ar
esel
ect
edont
hebasi
sofmer
it
.
ButinT. M.APaiFoundat ionv.Stat
eofKar nataka[16],i
twashel dthat“Ami nori
ty
i
nstitut
ionmayhav eitsownpr ocedureandmet hodofadmi ssi
onaswel las
sel
ect i
onofst udent s,butsuchapr oceduremustbef ai
randt r
ansparent,andthe
sel
ect i
onofst udent sinpr of
essi
onal andhighereducationcoll
egesshouldbeont he
basisofmer i
t.Thepr ocedureadopt edorselecti
onmadeshoul dnottantamountt o
maladmi nistr
ation.Evenanunai dedmi nori
tyinsti
tuti
onoughtnott oignorethemer i
t
ofthest udentst othecollegesaforesaid,
asi nthatevent,t
heinsti
tut
ionwi l
lfai
lto
achieveex cel
lence”.
Thecour
tal
soover
rul
edt
hedeci
sioni
nSt.St
ephen‟scase.Thecour
thasnow
grant
edt
hepowert
othest
atet
ofixquot
asforminori
tyst
udents.
3.
4:Ri
ghtt
oConst
it
uti
onal
Remedy
,Ar
ti
cle32(
incl
udi
ngPI
L)
ARTI CLE32
Art.32'sri
ghttoaccesstotheSupremeCour ti
saFundament alRi
ghtinandofitsel
f.
Sinceani ndivi
dualmaygostrai
ghttotheSupremeCour twit
houthav i
ngtogo
throughthedi l
ator
yphaseofproceedingfr
om thelowertothehigherCourtasin
otherordinaryli
ti
gati
on,
Art
icle32offersaguarant
eed,simple,andsummar yremedy
forenforcingtheFundamentalRi
ghts.

TheI
ndi
anConst
it
uti
on'
sDr
aft
ingChai
rmanr
efer
redt
oAr
ti
cle32ast
he"
soul
and
heart
"oft
heConstit
uti
onbecauseitoff
eredmeani
ngf
ulr
emedi
esforv
iol
ati
onsof
Fundamental
Right
s,wit
houtwhichtheConst
it
uti
onwoul
dbevoi
d.
Thef
oll
owi
ngi
sthet
extofAr
ti
cle32oft
heconst
it
uti
on:
Ar
ti
cle32.Remedi
esf
orenf
orcementofr
ight
sconf
err
edbyt
hisPar
t
1.Theri
ghttobri
nganeff
ecti
veacti
onintheSupr
emeCour
ttoenf
orcet
he
ri
ght
sgrantedbyt
hisParti
sassured.
2.Fortheenfor
cementofanyoft herightsconferr
edbyt hisPar
t,theSupreme
Courtmayissueinst
ruct
ions,order
s, orwri
ts,i
ncludi
ngwr i
tsi
nt henatureof
habeascorpus,
mandamus, pr
ohibi
tion,quowarranto,andcert
iorar
i,as
appl
icabl
e.
3.Withoutexcept
iontothepower sbest
owedontheSupremeCourtbyclauses
(1)and(2),Par
li
amentcanbyst atut
eall
owanyothercour
ttoexer
ciseallor
anyofthepower sexerci
sablebytheSupr
emeCourtundercl
auses(1)and(2)
withi
nthelocall
imit
sofitsjuri
sdi
cti
on(2)
4.Butasother
wiseestabl
ishedbythi
sConst
it
uti
on,
thef
reedom gr
ant
edbyt
his
prov
isi
onshallnotbesuspended.

Art.32(
1)provi
desavi
talsafeguardf
orthesecuri
tyofIndi
a'
speopl
e'fundament
al
ri
ghts.I
tguarant
eest
hefreedom topetit
iont
heSupremeCour ti
npropercour
tsfor
theprotect
ionoft
heConsti
tuti
on'sFundamental
Rights.

�Thi sCour tist

husconst i
tut
edtheguardi
anandguarantoroftheFundament al
Rights,�theCour tsai
dinRomeshThappar ,�anditcannot,consi
stentwit
ht he
burdensol aiduponit,
refusetoenter
tai
nappl
icat
ionsseekingimmunityagainst
vi
olationofthoseright
s.�

Art.32(2)empower stheSupr emeCour ttogranteffectiv

eor dersordir
ecti
v es,or
writs,suchashabeascor pus,mandamus, i
njuncti
on,quowar rant
o,andcertiorar
i,f
or
theexecutionofthepetiti
oner'sFundament al Ri
ghts,whi cheverisappropr
iate.It
best owsauthor
it
yont heCour ti nthebroadestsense.�I tismuchbr oaderand
cont ai
nswithi
nit
smat r
ixauthor i
tytoissuecer t
aindirectiv
es,orders,
orwr i
tswhi ch
mightbenecessar yforprotectionoftheFundament al Ri
ghtinquest i
on,� saysthe
cour t.
Ar t
icle32(3)empowersPar l
iamentt oallowanyot herCourt,
throughstatute, t
o
exer ci
seanyoranyoft hepower svestedintheSupr emeCour tbyArt.32wi thi
nt he
boundar iesofit
sgeographical j
uri
sdicti
on(2).Thiscanbeachi eved,
though, without
j
eopar di
singtheSupr
emeCour t
'spowersunderAr ts.32(
1)and32( 2).(2).The
framer softheconsti
tuti
onr ecognisedthat,gi
v enitsposit
ionandusef ulness,and
thev astscaleofthenati
on, theSupremeCour talonewoul dnotbeabl etomeett he
needsoft hepeoplef
orthisr eason.
I
t'
spossiblethattheybel
ievetheseabili
tieswil
lbeneededmoreandmoreinthe
f
utur
e.Theyexpr esslypr
ovidedf ori
tintheconsti
tut
ion,andal
l
owedthepar
li
ament
t
oallowev er
yothercourttoexer ci
sethesepowerswi t
hinthel
ocal
li
mit
sof
j
uri
sdict
ionofthatcourt,
ant i
cipati
ngthi
sci r
cumstance.

Therightgr
antedbyArt.32�shallnotbesuspendedexceptasot
her
wisepr
ovi
ded
forbytheConsti
tut
ion,
� accor
dingtoArt.32(
4).
Forexampl
e,dur
inganemer gency,Ar
t.359all
owsanexecut
ivedecreetosuspend
theabi
li
tyt
opeti
tionanycourtfort
heprotect
ionoff
undamentalr
ights.

Evenaf terthe44thamendmentt oIndi

a'
sconst
it
uti
on,consti
tut
ionalr
ights
guaranteedbyAr ti
cles21and22cannotbesuspended,evenduringastateof
emer gency .Onl
yapar t
icul
arstat
utor
yamendment,
notast at
ute,wil
lsuspendt
he
ri
ghtgr antedunderthisArt
icl
e.
ARTICLE226
Art
icl
e226asav
ail
abl
eint
heconst
it
uti
oni
srepr
oducedbel
ow:

Cl.(1)Thenon-obstanteprovisi
oni
nAr ticl
e226showst hattheHighCour t'
s
authori
tytoi
ssuewr itsordersandinst
ruct i
onsinimpropercasesi ssepar atef
rom
theSupremeCour t'
spower sunderAr t
icle32oft heconstit
ution.I
naddi t
ion,Art
icl
e
226hasamuchbr oaderreachthanArticle32.Theapplicati
onoft hesepower sis
notlimit
edtofundament alri
ghtsal
one, butalsoincl
udes" everyotherreason."

Cl
.(2)ofArti
cle226li
mit
sthejur
isdi
cti
onofthissecti
ontoacer
tai
ngeographical
ar
ea.Theabili
tyoftheHi
ghCourtstoexer
cisethesepowersi
sli
mitedtothei
r
pr
ovinci
alauthor
it
y.Asaresul
t,i
ntermsofjur
isdict
ion,
theHi
ghCourts'
funct
ions
ar
ereduced.
Cl.(3)ofArti
cle226pr otectsfr
om t henegati
veconsequencesofex- parte
provisi
onaldir
ectionsissuedbyHi ghCour t
sunderAr t
icl
e226.Theconst i
tut
ionhas
acar ef
ull
ywr i
ttenclausethatislargelyf
ocusedonnat ur
aljust
iceideals,namely,
thatnoonecanbepr osecutedwithoutfi
rstbeinghear
d.Noadv erseor dercanbe
i
mposedbehi ndthebackoft hepersonwhowi l
lbeharmedbyi t.I
fsuchanor deri
s
made, theothersideisent i
tl
edtoahear ingwithi
ntwoweeks, asgivenbyt his
provisi
on.
Clause(4)ofAr t
icl
e226cl ari
fiesthattheHighCour ts'powersunderthi
sArti
cle
wouldnotbei nconflictwi
tht heSupr emeCour t'
spower sunderArti
cle32.Despi
te
thefactthatthetwopr ovi
sionsar esimil
ar,theSupremeCour thastheupperhandin
thi
scase.Af t
ergoingt hr
ought hegeneralcontoursoftheSupremeCour t'
spowers
underArticl
e32andt heHighCour ts'powersunderAr ti
cle226oftheconstit
uti
on,i
t
becomescl earthattheessenceoft hesepower sisalmostident
ical
.

TheSupremeCourt'
spowersarelimit
edtothepr
otect
ionoffundamental
rights
underArt
icl
e32oftheconsti
tut
ion,whil
etheHi
ghCourtmayusei t
spowersf orany
reasonot
herthant
heenforcementoffundament
alri
ghts.Asaresul
t,t
heHi ghCourt
hasabroaderscopeofauthor
it
ywheni
tcomest othei
ssueofwri
tjur
isdi
cti
on.The
Supr
emeCour t,ont
heotherhand,
hasabroadergeogr
aphi
cscopethantheHigh
Cour
ts.
TheHi ghCourt
s,underAr
t.226,
andt heSupremeCour
t,underAr
t.32,
hav
e
reci
procalaut
hori
tyovert
heprotect
ionofFundament
alRight
s.

It
'sbeendebatedwhet herapetit
ionert
ryi
ngtoimposehisFundamentalRights
shouldgodirect
lytotheSupremeCour tunderArt
.32,orwhetherhecanfirstgotoa
HighCourtunderArt.226.TheSupr emeCourtrul
edinRomeshThapparin1950t hat
suchanappl i
cantcouldgodirectl
ytotheSupremeCourtwit
houtfir
stgoingt ot
he
HighCourt.Accordi
ngt otheCourt,

�Unl i
keArt.226,Art.32bestowsaFundament al
Rightontheappli
cantandplacesa
dutyontheSupr emeCour ttoful
fi
lwhenacit
izencompl ai
nsofaFundamental Ri
ght
vi
olat
ion.Ar
t .32establi
shestheSupr
emeCour tasthe�guar ant
orandguardianof
Fundamental Ri
ghts� andpr ovi
desaguar
anteedredressfort
heprotect
ionofthe
Fundamental Ri
ghts.�

Evenifthi
sopini
oniscorrectonthemeri
ts,i
twouldrenderAr
t.32obsol
ete,
since
theappell
antwil
lgototheHi ghCour
tfi
rstunderArt
.226andthentotheSupreme
Courtbywayofappeal,rathert
hanunderArt.32,
becauseoft
heconceptofres
j
udicata.
Thepri
nci
pleofr esj udicat
ast atesthatadeci si
onissuedbyacour tofcompet ent
j
uri
sdi
cti
onisf inalandbi ndingbetweent heparti
esuntili
tisov erturnedoramended
byanappeal,amendment ,
orot herlegalprocess.TheSupr emeCour thasruledthat
aHighCourt'
saut hor i
tyinconnect i
onwi thawr i
tpetit
ionunderAr t.226isalmost
i
denti
calt
othatoft heSupr emeCour tunderAr t
.32.Accordingt ot heconcurrent
nat
ureofthewr itsinbot hArti
cles,resjudicat
aapplies.Thev erdictoft heHighCourt
maybeappeal edt otheSupr emeCour t,butnotbyawr i
tpeti
tion.

Whenal it
igantgoestotheSupremeCour t,
thecaseisulti
matel
yset t
ledbytheCourt
.
I
fhegoest otheHighCourt
,though,thepeti
ti
onisfi
rstresol
vedbyasi ngl
ejudge,
foll
owedbyanappeal t
othedivi
sionbench,andthen,anappealtotheSupreme
Court.I
nreali
ty,t
hiscancausemor etimeandcostthecompl ai
nantmor emoney
thanfil
i
ngawr i
tpeti
ti
onunderArt.32dir
ectl
y.

Asaresul
t,wr
itpeti
ti
onsmaybefi
l
edintheSupremeCour
tunderAr
t.32wi
thout
hav
ingtogothroughtheHi
ghCour
tunderAr
t.226.
Essent
ial
sforawr
it
Thefol
l
owingt
woprovi
sionsmustbemetbef
oreawr
itappeal
onAr
ti
cle32maybe
l
odgedwit
htheSupr
emeCourt.
1.Ther
emustbeav
iol
ati
onofhumanr
ight
s.
2.I
tshoul
dbecl
earofal
lot
herr
emedyopt
ions.
Ty
peofWr
it
s
TheConst
it
uti
onempower
stheSupr
emeCour
tandHi
ghCour
tst
oissueor
der
sor
wri
ts.
Thet
ypesofwr
it
sar
e:
 HabeasCor
pus
 Cer
ti
orar
i
 Pr
ohi
bit
ion
 Mandamus
 QuoWar
rant
o
HabeasCor
pus
HabeasCor pusisawr i
tthatisenforcedt oprot
ectthefundament alr
ighttoli
bert
yof
anindivi
dualagainstunlawfuldetention.Thi
swr i
tcommandsapubl i
coffici
alt
o
del
iveradetainedpersoni nfrontofthecour tandprovi
dev al
idreasonsf ort
he
detent
ion.Howev er,t
hiswr i
tcannotbei ssuedincasethepr oceedingisfor
contemptofal egisl
atureoracour t.
Cer
ti
orar
i
Thewr i
tofcer ti
orar
iisissuedt oalowercourtdi
recti
ngthatt
hetransf
erofacase
forrevi
ew, usual
lytoov err
ulethejudgmentofthelowercourt
.TheSupremeCourt
i
ssuest hewr i
tofCertiorarii
ncaset hedeci
sionpassedbythelowercour
tis
chall
engedbyt hepar t
y .I
tisissuedincasethehighercour
tfi
ndsitamatterofov
er
j
urisdi
ctionorlackofjur i
sdi
ction.
I
tisoneoft
hemechani
smsbywhi
cht
hef
undament
alr
ight
soft
heci
ti
zensar
e
uphel
d.
Pr
ohi
bit
ion
Prohibiti
onisawr iti
ssuedbyahi ghercourttoalowercourtt
oenforceinact
ivi
tyin
thejurisdi
cti
on.Ithappensonlyincasethehi ghercour
tisoft
hediscret
ionthatthe
casef all
soutsi
det hejur
isdi
cti
onoft helowercourt.Wri
tofProhi
bit
ioncanonlybe
i
ssuedagai nstjudici
alandquasi-
judici
alauthori
ti
es.
Mandamus
Thewritofmandamusisi
ssuedtoasubor
dinat
ecourt
,anoff
iceroft
hegover
nment,
oracorporat
ionorot
heri
nst
it
uti
oncommandingtheperf
ormanceofcer
tai
nactsor
dut
ies.
Unl
i
keHabeasCor
pus,
Mandamuscannotbei
ssuedagai
nstapr
ivat
eindi
vi
dual
.
Thewritofmandamuscanbeusedt
oor dert
hecompl
eti
onofat
askori
not
her
cases,
itmayrequi
reanact
ivi
tyt
obeceased.
Quo-
War
rant
o
Quowarr
antoi
sissuedagainstaper
sonwhoclaimsorusur
psapublicof
fice.
Thr
oughthi
swri
t,thecour
tinqui
res‘
bywhatauthor
it
y’t
hepersonsuppor
tshisorher
cl
aim.
Throught
hiswr i
t,t
hecour
tenqui
resi
ntot
helegal
i
tyofaclai
m ofaper
sontoa
publi
coff
ice.Thi
swr i
tpr
event
stheil
l
egal
assumptionofapubl
icof
fi
cebyan
i
ndivi
dual
.

Suspensi
onofFundament
alRi
ght
s
 Fundamentalri
ghtscanbesuspendedi
nthecaseofNat
ional
Emer
gencyas
mentionedunderart
icl
e352.
 Thesixfundament al
rightsunderAr
ticl
e19areautomati
cal
lysuspendedi
n
thecaseNationalEmer gencyi
simposedongr oundsofwarorexter
nal
aggressi
onwhi chisstatedunderar
ti
cle358.
 Art
icl
e359hast hecl
auseforsuspensi
onofot
herri
ghts.I
nthatcase,
a
separ
atenot
if
icati
onhastobei ssuedbyt
hePresi
dent
.
 Ther
ight
sment
ionedunderAr
ti
cle20and21cannev
erbesuspended.
 Consti
tut
ionalemergencyandf
inanci
alemer
gencycannotaf
fectt
he
FundamentalRight
s.
PI
L
PILhasnotbeendef inedinanyI ndianstatut
e.Howev er,Cour
tshaveint
erpret
edand
defi
nedPI L.TheHon’bleSupr emeCour tofIndiahas, i
nthecaseofJanat aDalv.
H.S.
Chaudhar y,[
(AI
R1993SC892)hel dt hatlexical
ly
, t
heexpressi
on‘PI
L’meansa
l
egal acti
onstart
edinacour toflawf ortheenf orcementofpublic/
generali
nter
est
wheret hepubli
corapar t
icularclassofthepubl i
csomei nter
est(i
ncl
udi
ngpecuniary
i
nterest)thataf
fect
st hei
rlegalri
ghtsorliabil
i
ties.
PILsareconsider
edt obet hemostef f
ecti
veaswellasthemostcommonl yused
j
udici
altooltosafeguardtheenv i
ronmentduetothei
rmanyadv ant
agesincl
uding
butnotli
mitedtospeedyr esult
s,nominalcour
tfees,r
elaxedprocedural
rul
esand
thewidevariet
yofinvesti
gativ
et echni
quesavai
labl
etocour t
slikespeci
al
commi t
tees.
Whocanf
il
eaPI
L?
Anyindi
vi
dual oror
gani
sati
oncanfil
eaPILeitheri
nhis/her
/thei
rownstandingi.
e.t
o
prot
ectorenforceari
ghtowedtohim/her
/them bythegovernmentoronbehalfofa
sect
ionofsocietywhoisdi
sadvant
agedoroppressedandisnotabletoenforce
thei
rownrights.
Theconceptof“LocusStandi
”hasbeenrelaxedinthecaseofPILssoastoenabl
e
theHon’
bl eCourtt
olookint
ogri
evancesthatarefi
l
edonbehal foft
hosewhoare
poor,
il
li
terat
e,depri
vedordi
sabl
edandareunabl etoapproachthecour
ts
themsel
v es.
However,onl
yaper sonactingingoodf ai
thandwhohassuffi
cienti
nter
estinthe
pr
oceedingwill
hav ethelocusstanditofi
leaPIL.Apersonwhoapproachesthe
Hon’bl
eCourtforpersonalgain,pr
ivat
eprofi
t,pol
it
ical
oranyobli
queconsider
ati
on
wi
llnotbeentert
ained.
Wher
ecanaPI
Lbef
il
ed?
PILsar
eextensi
onsofWri
tJur
isdi
cti
on.Ther
efore,
PILsmaybefi
ledei
therbef
ore
theHon’
bleSupr
emeCourtofI
ndiaunderArt
icl
e32oft heI
ndi
anConst
itut
ionorany
HighCour
tunderArt
icl
e226oftheI
ndianConsti
tut
ion.
Howev er,ev
enasi mplel
et terorapost cardaddressedtotheChiefJusticeofI ndi
a
ortheChiefJusti
ceofaHi ghCour tmaysuf fi
ce.Thecourtmayt henchooset otake
cognizanceofthelett
erandconv ertitintoaPILasi nthecaseofRur alLiti
gati
on&
Enti
tlementKendra,Dehradunv s.St ateofUt t
arPradesh[(AI
R1989SC594), where
theHon’bleCourtconver
t edal etterr ai
singtheissueofunauthorisedandi ll
egal
mininginMussoor i
eHill
si ntoawr i
tpet i
ti
onunderPubl i
cInt
erestLit
igation.
Lawsgov
erni
ngPI
LinI
ndi
a
Overt
hey
ear
s,t
hecour
tsi
nIndi
ahav
efor
mul
atedv
ari
ouspr
inci
pleswi
thr
espectt
o
PI
Ls:
 Relaxedruleoflocusstandi-PI
Lscanbef i
l
edbyanyper sonf orthewelfareof
otherswhoar edisadvantagedandarethusunabl etoapproacht hecourts
themselves.Thus,thegeneralr
uleoflocusst andi
hasbeenr elaxedincases
ofPILstopr ot
ectandsaf eguar
dtheinterestsandright
softhese
disadvant
agedpeopl e.
 Relaxedprocedur
alr
ules-Courtshavetreat
edevenal et
terorat el
egram asa
PILasinthecaseofRur al
Liti
gation&Entit
lementKendra,Dehradunv s.Stat
e
ofUttarPradesh.Eventhelawr egar
dingpleadi
ngshasbeenr elaxedbyt he
courtsincasesofPI
Ls.
 I
nter
vent
ionbythecourt
s–Cour t
shasalsohi ghl
i
ghtedthefactthatArt
icl
e14
&21oftheConsti
tut
ionofIndi
aandt heI
nternati
onalConventi
onsonHuman
Ri
ghtsprov
idef
orafairandreasonablet
ri
al.Thus,Court
smusti nter
vene
wheninj
usti
cei
sdonet omany .
 Questionofmai ntai
nabil
i
ty-TheGov er
nmentmaynotbeal lowedt
orai
se
questionsastot hemaintai
nabil
i
t yoft
hePILi
fthecourtisprimef
aci
e
satisf
iedthattherei
sav ari
ati
onofanyconsti
tut
ional
rightsofa
disadvantagedcategoryofpeople.
 Pri
ncipl
eofResJudicat
a-Thepri
nci
pleofresjudi
cat
aoranypri
ncipl
es
anal
ogoustoitwoulddependontheci
rcumstancesandf
actsofthecaseand
thenatur
eofthePIL.
 Appoi
ntmentofaCommi ssi
on-Inspecialci
rcumstances,acourtmayappoi
nt
aCommi ssi
onorotherbodiestoinvesti
gate.I
ntheev entt
hatthe
Commissiontakesoverapubli
cinstit
uti
on,theCourtmaydi r
ectmanagement
ofi
t.
  PI
Lsregardingconst
it
uti
onali
tyorval
idi
tyofastat
uteorastat
utor
yrul
e–
Or
dinar
il
y,theHighCourtshouldnotent
ertai
nsuchapeti
ti
onbywayofaPIL.
 Compl eteJust
ice–UnderAr t
icl
e142oft heConst
ituti
onofIndi
a,t
heHon’ bl
e
SupremeCour tofIndiahasthediscreti
onarypowert opassadecreeororder
asmaybenecessar ytodocompl etejusti
ce.Howev er,
whil
ehighcourtsmay
passor der
stodocompl et
ejust
ice,theydonothav epowersakintothose
grantedtotheHon’bleSupremeCour tunderArti
cle142.
 MisuseofPI Ls–Cour tsareextr
emel ycaut ioust oensur et hatPILsarenot
misusedast hemi suseofPILswoul ddef eatt heverypur posef orwhichitwas
conceivedi.
e.tocomet otherescueoft hepoorandt hedownt rodden.The
courtshave,ti
meandagai n,r
eit
eratedt hisf actasint hecaseofKushum Lat a
v.UnionofIndia{[
(2006)6SCC180]( seeher e)}
.Howev er,courtshav eheld
thatevenifthepetit
ionerhadappr oachedt hecour tforhisownpr i
vate
i
nterestduet ohi
sper sonalgri
evances, thecour tmayt reatitnecessar yto
i
nquireintothesubjectofthelit
igati
onandi tsstateofaf fair
sinf urt
herance
ofpublici
nterest
.
3.
5:Const
it
uti
onal
Saf
eguar
dst
oCi
vi
lSer
vant
s(Ar
ti
cles309-
311)
Ar
ti
cle309i
nTheConst
it
uti
onOfI
ndi
a1949
309.Recr uitmentandcondi ti
onsofser v i
ceofper sonsservingtheUni onoraSt ate
Subjectt otheprov isionsoft hisConst i
tution,Actsoftheappr opri
ateLegi slature
mayr egulat
ether ecr uit
ment ,
andcondi t
ionsofser vi
ceofpersonsappoi nted, t
o
publicser vi
cesandpost sinconnect ionwi ththeaffai
rsoftheUni onorofanySt ate:
Prov i
dedt hati
tshal lbecompet entforthePr esidentorsuchper sonashemaydi rect
i
nt hecaseofser vicesandpost sinconnect ionwi t
htheaffair
soft heUni on, andf or
theGov er
norofaSt ateorsuchper sonashemaydi recti
nthecaseofser vicesand
postsi nconnectionwi ththeaf fai
rsoft heSt ate,t
omaker ulesregul at
ingt he
recruitment,andthecondi t
ionsofser viceofper sonsappointed,tosuchser vices
andpost sunti
lprov isionint hatbehalfismadebyorunderanActoft heappr opriate
Legislatureundert hisar t
icl
e, andanyr ulessomadeshal lhaveef fectsubjectt ot he
provisionsofanysuchAct
DOCTRI
NEOFPLEASURE
Theor i
ginofthedoct ri
neofpl easur ecanbet r
acedbackt oEnglandtot heLatin
phrase“durantebenepl acit
o( duringpleasur
e)”.Iti
sacommonl awrul
ehav ing
specialprer
ogativeoftheBr it
ishcr own.InEngland,aser vantofthecrownhol ds
offi
ceduringthepl easureofthecr ownandhecanbedi smissedf r
om theser vi
ceof
thecrownatpl easure.Thet enureoft heoffi
ceofaci vilservantcanbet er
mi natedat
anytimewi thoutassigninganycause.Ev enifthereexistsanyspecialcontract
betweent hecrownandt hecivilser v
antconcerned,thecr ownisnotboundbyi t.
Theciv
ilservanti
sli
abl
etobedismissedwithoutnot
iceandhe/
shecan’ tcl
aim
damagesf orwrongf
uldi
smissalori
mmat ur
et er
minati
onofser
viceexceptwherei
t
i
sotherwiseprovi
dedbyastatut
e.Thejusti
fi
cati
onforther
ulei
st hatt
hecrown
shoul
dn’tbe;
 1.Boundtocont
inuet
hepubl
i
cser
viceofanyper
sonwhoseconducti
snot
sat
isf
actor
y.
2.Shackl
eitsf
utur
eexecut
iveact
ionbyent
eri
ngi
ntoanagr
eementi
nmat
ter
s
concer
ningt
hewelf
areofthecountr
y.
Thedoctr
ineofpl
easur
eisbasedonpubl
i
cpol
i
cy.I
tsoper
ati
on,
howev
er,
canbe
modif
iedbyanactofParl
i
ament.
Doct
ri
neofpl
easur
einI
ndi
a
I
nIndia,t
hedoct
rineofpl
easurehasnotbeencompl etel
yadheredto,ratherithas
beenmodifi
edtosuitt
heneedsofthecountry.Thi
sdoctrinehasbeeni ncorporat
ed
i
nAr t
icl
e310oftheConsti
tut
ionofIndi
a.Art
icle310(1)r
eadsasf ol
lows:
“exceptasexpresslyprovi
dedbyt heConsti
tuti
on,ev
eryperson, whoisamemberof
defenceservi
ceorofaci vilser
v i
ceoftheUnionorofanAllIndiaServi
ceorholds
anypostconnect edwithdefenceoranycivi
lpostundertheUni on,hol
dsoffi
ce
duringthepl
easur eofthePresident
,thest
ateholdsoff
iceduringthepleasur
eofthe
Gov er
noroftheSt at
e.”
Inourconst i
tuti
onalset-
up, whenanof fi
ceishel dduri
ngthepl easureofthe
President,
itmeanst hattheof f
icercanber emov edbytheaut hori
tyonwhose
pleasurehehol dsoff
ice,withoutassigni
nganyr eason.Theaut horit
yisnotobli
ged
toassignanyr easonordi scl
oseanycausef ortheremoval.Articl
e310alsomakesi t
clearthatthoughaper sonser v
est heUnionoraSt ateduri
ngt hepleasureofthe
President/
Gov ernor
,thepowerofr emovalatpleasureissubjectedtotheother
expressprov i
sionsoftheConst it
ution.
PleasureunderAr ti
cle310i snotr
equi redtobeexer ci
sedbyt hePresi
dentorthe
Gov ernorpersonall
y.Itmaybeexer cisedbythePr esidentortheGovernoracti
ngon
theadv iceoftheCounci lofMini
sters.Inanothercase, i
twasdecidedthatthe
pleasureoft hePresidentortheGov ernorunderArti
cle310i snotsubj
ectt oany
contractandcannotbef ett
eredbycont r
act
,ordi
naryl egi
slat
ion,
ortherulesmade
underAr t
icl
e309.

Whati
sthei
mpl
i
cat
ionoft
hedoct
ri
neofpl
easur
e?
TheSupremeCourthasj
usti
fi
edthepl
easuredoct
rineont hebasi
sof‘publi
cpol
icy
’,
‘
publ
icinter
est
’and‘
publ
icgood’
insof
arasinef
fi
cient,
dishonestorcorr
uptper
sons,
ort
hosewhohav ebecomeasecuri
tyri
sk,
shouldnotcontinueinserv
ice.
UnderArticl
e310,t
hegov ernmenthast heaut hor
it
ytopenalizeanyofit
sser v
ants
formisconductcommi t
tednotonl yinthecour seofoffi
cial
dut i
esbutevenforthat
commi tt
edbyhimi npri
vatelif
e.Thegov ernmenthasther i
ghttoexpectthateachof
i
tsservantswil
labi
debycer tainvaluesofdecencyandmor alit
yinhispri
vateli
fe.If
thegovernmentwerenotabl etodoso, therewouldbeanappal li
ngfal
li
nt hemor al
prest
igeoftheadminist
rati
on.Thus, di
sci pli
naryact
ioncanbet akenagainstapolice
constabl
e(forexampl
e)forbehav
ingcr
udel
yandi
mpr
oper
lywi
thamemberoft
he
publi
cinhispri
vatel
if
e.
Whatar
etheexcept
ionst
othedoct
ri
neofpl
easur
e?
Thet er
m exceptasexpr esslyprovidedbytheConst i
tut
ionpr ovi
dedinArti
cle
310(1)clearlystatesthattheDoct r
ineofpleasureissubjectedtootherexpress
provi
sionsoft heConst it
ution.Art
icle310(1)wil
lnotapplywher etheconsti
tuti
on
expresslyprovidesforsecur edtenuredif
ferentf
rom thatprov i
dedinArt
icl
e310and
hencet hoseser vantsshallbeexcludedfrom it
.Thef ol
l
owi ngpersonshave
constit
utionall
ysecur edtenureasf oll
ows:
 TheSupremeCour
tandt
heHi
ghCour
tjudges.(
Art
icl
e124andAr
ti
cle217
respect
ivel
y);
 TheCompt
rol
l
erandAudi
tor
-Gener
alofI
ndi
a(Ar
ti
cle148)
;
 Chai
rmanandMember
sofPubl
i
cSer
viceCommi
ssi
on(
Art
icl
e317)and
 TheChi
efEl
ect
ionCommi
ssi
oner(
Art
icl
e324)
.
Thedoctri
neofpl
easur
edoesnotappl yt
otheholdersoftheseoffi
ces.However
,
theycanberemovedfr
om theoffi
ceonthegroundsof‘pr
ov edmisbehavi
our
’or
‘
incapaci
ty’
byfol
l
owingtheprocedur
eprovi
dedbyt heconstit
uti
on.
Ci
vi
lser
vant
shi
stor
y
Theor iginofI ndi
anci vilserv i
cescanbet racedbackt oEngl andwheni twasof f
iciall
y
t
h th
knownasI mper i
alcivi
l servicei nthel ate18 cent urytoear l
y19 cent ur y.I
twas
consider edt obeanexam f ortheel itecl asswho, afterpassi ngt heexam, wouldbe
appoi ntedundert hecr ownunderSect ionXXXI Ioft heGov ernmentofI ndiaAct ,
1858,
enact edbyt hePar li
amentoft heUK.I twasheadedbyt heSecr et aryofSt atefor
India,aBr it
ishmembercabi net .Ther eby ,theyshal lwor kundert hecr own’spl easur e.
Af t
ert heI ndianindependence, theinkl i
ngt oest ablishaPubl i
cSer viceCommi ssion
forther ecruitmentofPubl icSer vicesi nt hecount rywasf irstexpr essedi nthe
memor andum pr esentedt ot heCommi tteeont hedi vi
sionoff unct i
onsby
theGov ernmentofI ndiai n1919.TheRoy al Commi ssi
ononPubl icSer vices(Lee
Commi ssion)i n1924,emphasi sedt her equi rementf orest ablishi ngwi thoutdel aya
Publ i
cSer viceCommi ssi onundert heGov ernmentofI ndi aAct , 1919.Theypl anned
toal l
ott ot heCommi ssi onf ourdi ff
erentpur poses; Fir
st, t
heenr ol l
mentof
empl oy eesf orpubl i
cser v i
ces; Second, properst andar dizationofqual i
fi
cat i
onsf or
admi ssi ont otheser vi
ces; Thi r
d, punitivecont rolandpr otect i
onofser vi
cesand
finall
y, adv i
soryrolesinr egar dt otheov er al
l servicecompl ications.
TheGov er
nmentofI ndiaAct,1935i nSecti
on264i ncl
udedthat,“ther
eshallbea
Publi
cSer v i
ceCommi ssionfortheFeder at
ionandaPubl i
cSer v
iceCommi ssionfor
eachPr ovince”.I
ndiaat tai
nedit
sI ndependencein1947andf ramedaconst i
tuti
on
accordi
ngt otheidealsoft hecountry.TheConsti
tuentAssembl y,tr
ustedwiththi
s
responsibil
ity
,didnotf ailt
oappreciatetheneedofaPubl i
cSer viceCommi ssion
bothforUni onandf ort heUnit
sf orpurposesofrecrui
tmenttot heCivi
l Ser
vicesas
wellasf ortheprotectionoftheinterestsoftheci
vilser
vants.
Whatar
etheconst
it
uti
onal
saf
eguar
dsunderAr
ti
cle311?
Art
icl
e311pr
ovi
desaprocedur
alsafeguard.Thissafeguar
dhasexi
stedsi
ncet
he
commencementofadmi
nist
rat
iveservi
cesi nIndi
ainthefor
m ofr
ules,
butt
he
saf
eguar
dwaselevat
edtoconsti
tut
ionalstatusin1935.
Allcivilserv
ant sholdof f i
cedur i
ngt hepleasur eoftheCr ownandar eli
abletobe
dismi ssedwi thoutanyr easonassi gnedtot hem att hetimeofdi smissalundert he
EnglishCommonLaw.TheSecr etaryofSt ateforthei mplement ati
onoft hedoct ri
ne
ofpleasur e,though, outlinedr ul
eswhi ch,accor di
ngt otheJudi cialCommi ttee, were
env i
sionedt oser veasasol emnpl edgetot heser vi
cest hatt
her ul
eofpl easur eshall
notbeusedi nawhi msi cal andcapr ici
ousmanner .Thenat ureoft herulesundert he
Gov ernmentofI ndiaAct , 1915,wer eexecutiveinstr
uct i
onsandi tmerelyhadt he
forceofl aw.Howev er ,i
n1919, Section96-Bwasi ntroducedbyt heBr iti
sh
Parli
amentwhi chreiteratedt heruleofpleasur e,subjecti
ngittocer tai
ncondi tions
andwasgi venst at
utoryf orcet othepr ov
ision.Inlateryears,aftercertain
modi ficati
ons, i
tculmi nat edasAr ti
cle311( 1)andAr ticl
e311( 2)inourconst itution.
Art
icl
e311(1):
–Accor dingtot
hisconsti
tuti
onalprovi
sion,
nocivi
lserv
antistobe
di
smissedorremov edbyanauthori
ty‘
subordinate’t
otheauthori
tybywhichhewas
appoi
nted.
Dismissalorremovalofaciv
ilservantbyanauthori
tysubor
dinat
etothe
appoi
nti
ngauthori
tyisinval
i
d.
Thisrequirementdoesn’tmeant hattheremoval/dismi ssalmustbebyt he
appointingauthori
tyhimselforhi sdir
ectsuperi
or.Itisenoughi ftheremov i
ng
authori
tyisoft hesame/ coor
dinat edrankorgradeast heappointi
ngauthor i
ty.The
dismissalofaci vi
lserv
antmustcompl ywit
hthepr ocedur elai
ddowni nAr ti
cle311.
Theobj ectofthesafeguardist hatthegovernmentser v ant
sar eenti
tl
edt othe
j
udgmentoft heauthorit
ybywhi chtheywereappoi ntedorsomeaut hori
tysuper i
or
tothataut hor
it
yandt hattheyshoul dnotbedismi ssedorr emov edbyal esser
authori
tyinwhosej udgmentt heymaynothav ethesamef ait
h.Theunder l
yingidea
i
st hatapr ovi
sionli
kethiswillensuret ot
hem acer tainamountofsecur ityoftenure.
Articl
e311( 2):
-Thi ssaf eguardwasi ntroducedf ort hefir
stt imei nt he1935Act
under( Sec.240( 3))andi tsscopewasi nterpretedinI.M.Lai ’scase.Bot ht he
prov i
sionsappl ytoaper sonwhoi samemberoft heci vi
l serviceoft heUni on,All
-
IndiaSer vices,t heci v i
lservi
cesofast ateorhol dsaci vilpostundert heUni onora
state.Themostsi gnificantli
mi tationi mposedont hedoct rineofpl easur ei sby
Articl
e311( 2).Accor dingtot hispr ov i
sion,noci vilserv
antcanbedi smi ssed,
remov edorr educedi nr ankexceptaf terani nquiryinwhi chhehasbeeni nformedof
thechar gesagai nsthi m andgi venar easonabl eoppor tunityofbei nghear din
respectoft hosechar ges.Theconceptof‘ reasonabl eoppor tunity’bei nga
const i
tut i
onal l
imi t
at i
onont hedoct rineof‘ tenureatpleasur e’,Parliamentorast ate
l
egi sl
at urecanenactal awdef iningt hecont entof‘ r
easonabl eoppor t unity’,and
prescr i
bingt hepr ocedur eforaf fordingt hesai doppor tunitytot heaccused
gov ernmentser vant .Pendi nglegi slation,rulescanbemadebyt heexecut i
vef orthe
purposeunderAr ti
cle309.Theconceptof‘ reasonableoppor tunityt oshowcause’ i
s
synony mouswi thnat uralj
ustice.Accor dingt otheSupr emeCour t, Article311( 2)
givesaconst i
tutional mandat etot hepr i
nciplesofnat ural j
ustice.
MODULE4
4.
1:Di
rect
ivePr
inci
plesofSt
atePol
i
cy(
Art36-51)

Unli
keFundament al Rights,theDi
recti
vePri
ncipl
esofSt atePol icy(
DPSP)arenon-
j
ustici
ablewhichmeanst heyarenotenfor
ceablebythecour t
sf ort
heirv
iol
ati
on.
Howev er,
theConst it
utionitsel
fdeclar
esthat‘
thesepri
nci plesar ef
undamentali
n
thegovernanceoft hecount ryanditshal
lbethedutyoft hest atetoappl
ythese
pri
ncipl
esinmaki ngl aws’.Hence,theyi
mposeamor alobl i
gationonthestat
e
authori
ti
esfortheirappl i
cati
on.
Li
stofDPSPsunderI
ndi
anConst
it
uti
on
Art
icle36:Def inesSt ateassameasAr ticle12unl essthecont extot herwisedef i
nes.
Art
icle37:Appl icat ionoft hePr i
ncipl escont ai
nedint hi
spar t.
Art
icle38:Itaut hor izest hest atet osecur easoci alorderf ort hepr omot ionoft he
welfareofpeopl e.
Art
icle39:Cer tainpr i
nciplesofpol iciest obef oll
owedbyt hest ate.
Art
icle39A: Equal justiceandf reel egal aid.
Art
icle40:Or gani zat i
onofv i
ll
agepanchay ats.
Art
icle41:Rightt owor k,toeducat ionandt opublicassi stancei ncer tai
ncases.
Art
icle42:Pr ovisionf orjustandhumanecondi ti
onsofwor kandmat er
nityleaves.
Art
icle43:Liv i
ngwageet c.f orwor ker s.
Art
icle43-A:Par ticipat i
onofwor ker sinmanagementofi ndust ries.
Art
icle43-B:Pr omot i
onofcooper at i
v esoci eti
es.
Art
icle44:Uni form ci v i
lcodef ortheci t
izens.
Art
icle45:Pr ovisionf orear lychildhoodcar eandeducat iont ochi ldrenbel owt heage
ofsixy ear
s.
Art
icle46:Pr omot ionofeducat i
onandeconomi cinterest sofSC, ST, andot her
weakerseAr ticle47: Dutyoft hest at etor aisethelevel ofnut riti
onandt hest andard
ofl
ivingandt oi mpr ov epubl icheal th.
Art
icle48:Or gani zat i
onofagr i
cultureandani malhusbandr y.
Art
icle48-A:Pr otect i
onandi mprov ementofenv i
ronmentandsaf eguar dingof
for
estsandwi ldlife.
Art
icle49:Pr otect ionofmonument sandpl acesandobj ectsofnat ionalimpor tance.
Art
icle50:Separ ationofj udiciaryfrom t heexecut ive.
Art
icle51:Pr omot ionofi nt ernati
onal peaceandsecur i
ty .
ctions.
DPSPUnderPr
eambl
e
ThePreambleoftheConstit
uti
oniscalledthekeytothemi ndofthedraft
ersofthe
Const
itut
ion.I
tlay
sdownt heobject
ivesthatourConstit
uti
onseekst oachiev
e.
Manyscholarsbel
iev
ethatDPSPsi sthekerneloftheConstit
uti
on.TheDirecti
ve
Pri
nci
plesoftheStat
ePoli
cy( DPSPs)laydownt heguidel
inesforthest
ateandar e
r
efl
ect
ionsoft
heov
eral
lobj
ect
ivesl
aiddowni
nthePr
eambl
eofConst
it
uti
on.

Theexpressi
onJust i
ce-social,economic,poli
ticali
ssoughttobeachievedthrough
DPSPs.DPSPsar ei
ncorporatedt oatt
aintheultimatei
dealsofpreamblei.
e.Justi
ce,
Li
bert
y,Equali
ty,andfrat
ernity.Moreover,
italsoembodiest hei
deaofthewel f
are
st
atewhichIndiawasdepr ivedofundercol onialrul
e.
Cl
assi
fi
cat
ionOfDPSPs:
Theconsti
tut
ionit
selfdoesnotcl
assi
fytheDPSPsbutf orthebetterappr
ehensi
on
andonthebasisoftheircont
entanddi
recti
on,theyareusuall
yclassi
fi
edint
othree
cat
egori
es:Social
i
sti
c,GandhianandLi
beral-
Int
ell
ectualPr
inci
ples.
1.Social
isti
cPr inci
ples:Theyemphasi sonpr ovi
dingbett
erstructur
efor
economi candsoci aljusti
ceandl aydownt heframeworkofdemocr ati
c
social
iststate.Theseal socontemplatetheideologyofsoci
alism.Theydir
ect
thestatethrough-Ar t
icle38,Arti
cle39,Art
icl
e39A, Ar
ti
cle41, Ar
ti
cle42,
Arti
cle43,Art i
cle43AandAr ti
cle47.

2.GandhianPri
ncipl
es:Theyref
lecttheGandhianphil
osophyofreconst
ruct
ion
enunci
atedbyGandhi dur
ingthenationalmovement.I
nor dert
opursuethe
pathwhichdir
ectedbyhimself,someofhisideasareincorpor
atedi
nDPSP
andtheydir
ectthestatet
hrough-Articl
e40,Art
icl
e43,Arti
cle43B,Art
icl
e46,
Art
icl
e47andAr t
icl
e48.

3.Li
beral-I
ntel
l
ectualPri
nci
ples:Theyemphasisont heideologyofliberal
i
sm
andincli
netowardsthepolit
icalandmoralphi
losophy -
basedl i
berty,
consent
ofcit
izensandequalit
ybeforethelaw.Theydir
ectthest atethrough-Arti
cle
44,Arti
cle45,Art
icl
e48,Arti
cle48A, Ar
ti
cle49,Arti
cle50andAr ti
cle51.

Enf
orceabi
l
ityofDPSPs
Manytimest
hequest
ionari
sesthatwhetherani
ndivi
dualcansuethestat
e
gover
nmentort
hecentr
algover
nmentfornotfoll
owingthedir
ect
ivepr
inci
ples
enumerat
edi
nPartI
V.Theanswert ot
hisquesti
onisinnegati
ve.

Thereasonforthesamel i
esinArti
cle37whichstatest hat:
Theprovi
sionscontai
nedinthisPartshal
lnotbeenfor ceablebyanycour t
,butt
he
pri
nci
plestherei
nlai
ddownar enev er
thel
essfundament alinthegovernanceofthe
count
ryandi tshal
lbethedutyoftheStatet
oappl ythesepr i
ncipl
esinmaki ngl
aws.
Thereforebythevir
tueofthisArt
icl
enopr ov
isionoft hi
spartcanbemade
enforceabl
einthecourtoflawthust heseprinciplescannotbeusedagainstt
he
centr
al gover
nmentorthest at
egover nment.Thi snon-j
usti
ciabi
l
ityofDPSPsmake
thestategovernmentorthecentralgovernmenti mmunef r
om anyacti
onagainst
them fornotfol
lowi
ngthesedirecti
ves.
Anotherquest
ionar
isesthatwhethert
heSupremeCourtorHighCour tcani
ssuethe
wri
tofmandamusi fthestatedoesnotfol
lowthedir
ect
ivepr
inci
ples.Theli
ter
al
meaningofmandamusi s“ t
ocommand. ”I
tisawritwhi
chisi
ssuedt oanypersonor
aut
horit
ywhohasbeenpr escr
ibedadutybythel
aw.Thiswri
tcompel stheauthor
it
y
todoitsduty.

TheWr itofmandamusi sgenerall

yissuedintwosi t
uations.Onei swhenaper son
fi
leswr itpetit
ionorwhent heCourtissuesitsuomot oi .
e.ownmot ion.Asper
Const it
utionalPrinci
ples,aCour ti
snotauthorizedtoissuet hewr i
tofmandamust o
thest atewhent heDi recti
vePrinci
plesarenotf ol
l
owedbecauset heDirecti
ve
Principleisay ardsti
ckint hehandofpeoplet ocheckt heper f
ormanceof
gov ernmentandnotav ai
lablef
orthecour t
s.ButtheCour tcantakesuomot oacti
on
whent hemat terisofut mostpublicimport
anceandaf fectthelar
gei nter
estofthe
publ i
c.

FundamentalRi
ghtsarethelegalobl
igat
ionofthestat
et orespect,whereasthe
DPSPsisthemor alobl
igat
ionofthestat
et of
ollow.Art
icl
e38l aydownt hebr oad
i
dealswhichastateshouldstr
ivetoachi
eve.Manyoft heseDirecti
vePrinci
pleshave
becomeenforceabl
ebybecomi ngalaw.Someoft heDPSPshav ewidenedthe
scopeofFundament al
Rights.

Rel
ati
onshi
pwi
thFundament
alRi
ght
s
Amaj orconcer
nr egar
dingthev
ali
dit
yoftheDPSPsisthei
rcompat i
bil
i
tywit
hthe
FundamentalRightscontai
nedi
nPartII
IoftheConst
it
uti
on,enfor
ceableev
eninthe
HighCourtsandtheSupr emeCour
tthroughthemannerofwrit
s.

Thef
oll
owi
ngar
ethepoi
ntsofdi
ff
erencebet
weent
het
wo:
1.TheFundamentalRi
ghtsareali
mitat
iononthepower softhegover
nment
operati
ngonanindi
vi
dual,
whereas,t
heDPSPsar einstr
uctionst
othe
governmentf
orachi
evi
ngcertai
nendst hr
oughthei
ractions.
2.Al awmadeagainstt
heDPSPsbyt hestat
ecannotbedeclar
edv oidbyt he
courtsasiti
saninst
rumentofi
nstr
ucti
ons'whi
chisunderdiscreti
onoft he
statetoappl
yornot,
butthi
sisnotint
hecaseofFundament alRights.

3.Whil
etheobj
ect
iveofFundamental
Rightsi
stoest
abli
shpoli
ti
caldemocr
acy
,
wher
eas,obj
ect
iveofDPSPsistoestabl
i
sheconomicandsocial
order
.

4.TheDPSPscannotbev iolatedassuchbyanyindi
vi
dualsort
hestateaut
hori
ty,
unti
lthereisanylawmadef orthepur
pose,whi
let
herearest
ri
ctmeasures
l
ikeArticl
e32and226ar egi v
eninconst
it
uti
onagainstt
hevi
olat
ionofan
i
ndivi
dual'sFundament
alright.
Judi
cial
Pronouncement
s
Thequest i
onthatwhet herFundament alRi
ghtsprecedesDPSPsorl at
tert
akes
precedenceoverformerhasbeent hesubjectofdebateforyear
s.Therearejudi
cial
pronouncementswhi chsettl
ethisdisputeofMadr asvs.Champakan( AI
R1951SC
226),theApexCour twasoft heviewthatifalawcont rav
enesaFundament alri
ght,
it
wouldbev oidbutthesamei snotwi ththeDPSPs.I tshowsthatFundamentalri
ghts
areonahi gherpedestalthanDPSPs.

InI.C.Gol
aknath&Or svs.StateOfPunj ab&Anr .(1967AIR1643) ,TheCourtwasof
theviewthatFundament alri
ght scannotbecur t
ail
edbyt helawmadebyt he
parli
ament.I
nfurtheranceoft hesamet heCourtalsosaidthatifalawismadet o
giveeff
ecttoArti
cle39(b)andAr ti
cle39(c)whichcomeundert hepurvi
ewofDPSPs
andintheprocess,thelawv i
ol atesArti
cle14,Art
icle19orAr t
icle31,t
hethelaw
cannotbedeclaredasunconst it
uti
onalandv oi
dmer el
yonthegr oundofsai
d
contrav
enti
on.

InKeshavnandaBhar at
ivstheStat
eofKer ala(1973)4SCC225) ,TheApexCour t
placedDPSPsont hehigherpedestalthanFundamentalRights.Ulti
matel
yint he
caseofMi nervaMi l
lsvs.UnionofI
ndi a(AI
R1980SC1789) ,t
hequest i
onbef orethe
courtwaswhet herthedi r
ecti
vepri
nciplesofStatepol
icyenshrinedinArtIVcan
haveprimacyov erthefundamental r
ightsconfer
redbyPartII
Ioft heConstit
ution.
Thecourtheldt hatthedoctri
neofhar moniousconstr
ucti
onshoul dbeappl i
ed
becauseneitherofthet wohasprecedencet oeachother.Bothar ecomplement ary
theref
oretheyar eneededt obebal
anced.
NewPr ovi
sionsofDir
ectiv
ePr i
ncipl
esaft
erAmendment
FournewDi rect
ivePr
inci
pleswereaddedinthe42ndAmendmentActof1976t
othe
ori
ginall
i
st.Theyarerequi
ringthestat
e:
42ndAmendment
1.Anaddedclausei
nArti
cle39:
Tosecur
eoppor
tuni
ti
esf
ort
heheal
thy
dev
elopmentofchi
ldr
en.
2.Anaddedcl
auseinArt
icl
e39asAr
ti
cle39A:
Topr
omot
eequal
just
ice
andt
oprovi
defreel
egalai
dtot
hepoor
3. Anaddedclausei
nArt
icl
e43asArt
icl
e43A:Totakestepstosecur
e
thepart
ici
pati
onofwor
kersi
nthemanagementofi
ndustri
es.
4. Anaddedclausei
nArt
icl
e48asArti
cle48A:
Toprot
ectandi
mpr
ove
theenvi
ronmentandt
osafeguar
dforest
sandwi
ldl
if
e.
44thConstit
uti
onalAmendment ,
1978addedAr t
icl
e38cl ause(2)whi
chdirectsthe
stat
et omi
nimi zeinequal
iti
esi
nincome,toeli
minateinequali
ti
esinst
atus,
f aci
li
ti
es
andopportunit
ies,notonlyamongstindi
vi
dualsbutal
soamongstgr oupsofpeopl e
resi
dingi
ndi f
ferentareasorengagedindif
fer
entvocati
ons.
73rdConsti
tut
ionalAmendment,1992whichbroughtPanchayat
sinPar
tIXoft
he
Consti
tut
ionhaditsgenesi
sinArti
cle40oftheconsti
tut
ion.I
tdeal
swit
hthe
Organi
zati
onofv i
ll
agePanchay
ats.
86thConstituti
onalAmendment ,
2002insert
edAr ti
cle21-AintheConstit
uti
onof
I
ndia.Itpr
ov i
desRighttofreeandcompulsoryeducationofallchi
ldreni
ntheage
groupofsixt ofour
teenyearsasaFundament alRight.Therootsofthi
samendment
areinArti
cle41whi chtal
ksaboutRightt
owor k,toeducationandt opubl
ic
assist
anceincer t
aincases.
97thConsti
tuti
onalAmendment2011addedArt
icl
e43-Bitaut
hori
zesthestat
eto
promotevol
untaryfor
mati
on,aut
onomousfuncti
oni
ng,democrat
iccontr
oland
prof
essi
onal managementoft
heco-oper
ati
vesoci
eti
es.
I
mpor
tanceofDPSPsf
oranI
ndi
anci
ti
zen
Regardlessofthenon-
just
ici
abl
enat ur
eofDPSPs, aci
tizenshouldbeawareofthem.
AstheAr ti
cle37it
sel
fdescri
besthesepri
nci esasf
pl undament ali
nthegovernance
ofthecountry.Theobj
ecti
veoftheDPSPsi stobett
erthesocialandeconomic
conditi
onsofsociet
ysopeoplecanl i
veagoodlif
e.Knowl edgeofDPSPshelpsa
ci
ti
z entokeepacheckont hegovernment.
Aci t
izencanuseDPSPsasameasur eoftheper for
manceoft hegovernmentand
cani dent
if
ythescopewher eitl
acks.Aper sonshouldknowt heseprovi
sions
becauseul t
imatel
ythesepr i
ncipl
esactasay ardsti
cktojudgethelawthatgov erns
them.Mor eover,i
tal
soconst rai
nst hepoweroft hestat
et omakeadr aconianlaw.
Throughv ari
ousjudi
cialpronouncement s,
itissettl
edprinci
plenowthatbalancing
DPSPsandFundament alr
ightsisasimpor tantasmaintaini
ngthesancti
tyof
Fundament alRi
ghts.Nonf oll
owingadi r
ectivepri
ncipl
ewoul ddir
ectl
yorindir
ectly
affecttheFundamental Ri
ghtwhi chisconsideredasoneoft hemostessent i
alparts
oftheConst i
tut
ion.
4.
2:Fundament
alDut
ies(
Art
icl
e51A)
The42ndAmendmentAct ,1976addedaChapt erIV-Awhichconsistofonlyone
Arti
cle51-Awhichdeal
twi t
haCodeofTenFundament al
Dutiesforci
ti
zens.
Fundament al
duti
esareintendedtoserveasaconstantremindertoeveryciti
zen
thatwhil
etheconsti
tut
ionspecifi
call
yconfer
redonthem certai
nFundament al
Right
s,ital
sorequi
rescit
izenstoobservecert
ainbasicnormsofdemocr atic
conductanddemocr at
icbehaviourbecauser
ightsanddutiesareco-r
elat
ive.

Fundament
alDut
ies
Ar
ti
cle51-
ASay
sthati
tshal
lbet
hedut
yofev
eryci
ti
zenofI
ndi
a-
1.toabidebytheconst it
ut i
onandr espectit
sidealandinsti
tuti
ons;
2.tocheri
shandf oll
owt henobl eidealswhichinspi
redournat i
onalst r
ugglefor
fr
eedom;
3.toupholdandpr otectthesov erei
gnty,uni
tyandintegr
ityofIndia;
4.todefendthecount ryandr endernat i
onal
servi
cewhencal ledupont odoso;
5.topromoteharmonyandt hespi r
itofcommonbr otherhoodamongstal l
the
peopleofIndi
atranscendi ngreli
gious,li
ngui
sti
candr egi
onal di
versi
ties,t
or enounce
pract
icesderogatorytothedi gnit
yofwomen;
6.tovalueandpreser vether i
chheritageofourcompositecul t
ure;
7.topr otectandi mpr ov
et henatural envi
ronmenti ncludi
ngf or
ests,lakes,ri
vers,and
wild-l
if
eandt ohav ecompassi onf orlivi
ngcr eatures;
8.todev elopt hescienti
fictemper, humani sm andt hespiri
tofinquir
yandr eform;
9.tosaf eguar dpubli
cpr opertyandt oabjur eviolence;
10.t ostri
v etowardsexcel l
enceinal l
spheresofi ndiv
idualandcollecti
v eacti
vit
y,so
thatthenat ionconst ant
lyrisestohi gherlevelsofendeav orand
achievement .Fur
ther,onemor eFundament aldut yhasbeenaddedt ot heIndian
Const i
tutionby86t hAmendmentoft heconst i
tut i
onin2002.
11.whoi sapar entorguar dian,topr ovi
deoppor tuniti
esforeducat i
ont ohischil
d, or
ast hecasemaybe, war dbetweent heageofsi xandf ourteenyears.

NeedForFundament
alDut
ies
Indi aisacount r
ywherepeoplebelongi
ngtodi f
fer
entcastes,
creed,rel
i
gion,sect
s
et c.livetoget
herandinordertomai nt
ainharmonyandpeaceandt oencouragethe
feel i
ngofbr ot
herhoodandonenessamongt hem f
oll
owingtheFundament alDuti
es
ont hei
rpartplaysavi
talr
oleinupholdi
ngandpr ot
ecti
ngthesov er
eignt
y,unit
yand
i
nt egri
tyofourcountr
ywhichisofinevi
tabl
ei mpor
tance.I
tremindstheciti
zensthat
right sanddutiesgohandinhand.

Enf
orcementofdut
ies
Thef undament al
dut i
esarestatutoryduti
esandshal lbeenf orceablebyLaw.
Parli
ament, ylaw, wi
llpr
ovidepenalti
estobei mposedf orfailuretofulf
ilthose
duti
esandobl i
gations.Thesuccessoft hisprovisionwoul d,howev er
,dependmuch
upont hemanneri nwhi chandt hepersonagai nstwhom t hesedut i
eswoul dbe
enforcedandf oritsproperenforcementitisnecessar ythatitshoul dbeknownt oal
l
.
InAIIMSSt udentsUni onv.AII
MS AI R(1983)1SCC471i thasbeenhel dthat
Fundament alDutiesthoughnotenf orceablebywr i
tofthecour t,yetprovi
dea
val
uabl eguideandai dtointer
pretat
ionofconst ituti
onalandl egal i
ssues.
4.
3Amendmentt
otheConst
it
uti
on(
Art
icl
e368)
Whati
stheBasi
cSt
ruct
ure?
TheBasi cSt r
uctureDoct r
inestat
estherearecer
tainfundamentalstr
uctur
esand
foundingpr i
ncipl
esoft heconstit
uti
onwhi chmakethebackboneoft heconsti
tut
ion.
Insimpl eterms,theyareideologi
esoftheconsti
tuti
onwhi chareessent
ialf
orthe
survi
v aloftheconstit
ution.Someexampl esareFreeandFairElect
ion,t
heFederal
natureoft heNat i
on,Judicial
revi
ewandSepar at
ionofPower .Thegovernmentis
restr
ictedfrom touchingthesecontoursoftheconsti
tuti
onthroughamendment .
TheSupr emeCour thasnotgi venusal istofthesei deologies.Iti
supt othecourts
todecidewhatt heyar ewhencer tainjudici
alquest i
onsar epr esentedbeforethem.
Butifonewant stodescr i
bethenat ur
eoft hest ructures,i
tcanbesai dthati
fthese
i
deologiesarev i
olated,thennotonl ydemocr acybutt heent ireworkingofthis
countrywil
l f
all
flatoni t
sf ace.Thecount rywilleit
herf al
lintototalanarchyor
tot
ali
tari
anism.Itisbecauseoft hesemechani smst hatIndiai ssti
l
l oneofthe
l
argestdemocr
aci
esi
nthewor
ld.
Thus,whil
eParl
iamenthasunrestr
ict
edpowerstoamendv ari
oussecti
onsoft
he
const
itut
ion,
buttheycannott
ouchamend,repealoraddsecti
onsint
othe
const
itut
ionwhi
chwoul daff
ectit
sbasicst
ruct
ureintheprocess.

ModesofAmendi
ngConst
it
uti
on
TheConst i
tut
ionofIndiaprovidesfortheamendmentbywayofAmendmentAct sin
aformal manner.Forthepurposeofamendment ,
thev ari
ousAr t
icl
esofthe
Consti
tuti
onar ediv
idedint
ot hreecategor
ies.Thef i
rstcategoryisoutofthepurvi
ew
ofArti
cle368wher eastheothertwoar eapar tandpar celofthesaidArt
icl
e.The
var
iouscategoriesofamendmentt otheConst i
tut
ioncanbesummar i
zedasf ol
l
ows:

#AmendmentbySi mpl
eMaj ority
Ast henamesuggest s,
anar ticlecanbeamendedi nthesamewaybyt heParli
ament
asanor dinarylawi spassedwhi chrequiressimplemaj ori
ty.Theamendment
contempl at
edunderAr ti
cles5- 11( Ci
tizenship),
169(Abol i
ti
onorcr eati
onof
Legislat
iveCounci l
si nStates)and239- A( Creat
ionoflocalLegisl
aturesorCouncil
of
Minister
sorbot hf ircer
tainUni onTer rit
ories)oftheI
ndi anConsti
tutioncanbemade
bysi mplemaj ori
ty.TheseAr ticlesarespeci fi
call
yexcl
udedf r
om thepurviewofthe
procedureprescribedunderAr t
icle368.

#AmendmentbySpeci alMaj ori

ty
Art
icleswhichcanbeamendedbyspeci almajor
it
yar
el ai
ddowni nArt
icl
e368.All
amendment s,exceptthoser efer
redtoabovecomewithinthi
scategor
yandmustbe
af
fect edbyamaj or
it
yoft otal membershi
pofeachHouseofPar l
i
amentaswel l
as
2/
3r dofthemember spr esentandv oti
ng.

#AmendmentbySpeci
alMaj
ori
tyandRat
if
icat
ionbySt
ates
Amendmentt ocer tainAr ti
clesrequiresspeci almajorit
yaswel lasrati
ficati
onby
states.Pr ovisot oAr ticle368l aysdownt hesaidrule.Ratifi
cationbyst atesmeans
thatt herehast obear esoluti
ont othatef f
ectbyone- halfofthest atelegisl
atures.
Thesear ticl
esincludeAr ti
cle54( El
ecti
onofPr esident)
,55( Mannerofel ecti
onof
Presi dent),73(Ext entofexecut i
vepoweroft heUnion),162( Extentofexecut iv
e
powerofSt ate),124- 147( TheUni onJudi ciary)
,214-231( TheHi ghCour t
sinthe
States) ,241( HighCour t
sf orUnionTerritories)
,245-255( Distr
ibuti
onofLegi slati
ve
power s)andAr ticl
e368( poweroft hePar l
iamentt oamendt heConst i
t uti
onand
procedur etherefor)itsel f
.Anyl i
stofsev ent hscheduleorr epresentati
onofst atesin
Parliamentasment ionedi nt hefourthschedul eisalsoincluded.
Pr
ocedur
eForAmendmentU/
A368
ABi
l
ltoamendt heConst
it
uti
onmaybei
ntr
oducedinei
therhouseoft
heParl
i
ament.
I
tmustbepassedbyeachhousebyamaj
ori
tyoft
hetot
al membershi
poft
hathouse
andbyamaj orit
yofnotlessthan2/3rdoft
hemember spresentandv ot
ing.
Thereaf
ter
,thebilli
spr
esentedtothePresi
dentforhi
sassentwhoshal lgivehis
assentandthereupont
heConst i
tut
ionshal
lstandamended.I
ncase,rati
ficati
onby
stat
eisrequir
edithastobedonebef orepr
esenti
ngitt
othePr esi
dentforhis/her
assent.

Maj
oramendment
s
Fi
rstAmendment
,1951
 TheConsti
tuti
on(Fi
rstAmendment)Act
,1951empoweredtheSt
atetomake
speci
alpr
ovisi
onstoadvancesoci
all
yandeconomi
cal
lybackwar
dclasses.
 Sav
ingsl
egi
sl
ati
onal
l
owi
ngf
ort
hepur
chaseofest
ates,
etc.
 AddedNi nthScheduletoprot
ectfrom j
udi
cial
rev
iewt
helandref
ormsand
otherlegi
slat
ionincl
udedinit
.Art
icles31Aand31Bwereaddedaft
erAr
ti
cle
31,respecti
vely
.
 Threemorereasonsf
orr
estri
cti
ngfreedom ofspeechandexpr essionhave
beenadded:publi
cor
der
,fr
iendl
yrel
ationswit
hf or
eignstat
es,andi nci
tement
toanoff
ence.Ital
somadetherestr
icti
ons‘
reasonable’
and,therefore,
in
natur
e,j
usti
ci
able.
 Issuesinthecasesincl
udedfreedom ofexpr
ession,
possessi
onofZamindari
estate,
Statetrademonopoly
, et
c.Theselawsbreachpr
opertyr
ight
s,f
reedom
ofspeech, andequal
it
ybeforethelaw.
TheConst
it
uti
on(
Sev
ent
eent
hAmendment
)Act
,1964
AmendedArti
cle31Aandpr ov
idesthattheacqui
sit
ionofanylandunderper
sonal
cul
ti
vati
onbythest at
eshal
lbeheldunlawfulwi
thoutpaymentofcompensati
on
equalt
othemar ketval
ue.
Amendedt
heNi
nthSchedul
eandadded44st
ateact
srel
ati
ngt
olandmat
ter
s.
TheConst
it
uti
on(
24t
hAmendmentAct
),
1971
 Af
fir
medPar l
iament
’saut
hori
ty,
byamendingAr
ticl
es13and368,
tochange
ev
eryaspectoftheConst
it
uti
onincl
udi
ngconst
it
uti
onalr
ight
s.
 Madeitcompul
sor
ythatt
hePr
esi
dentgi
vehi
sappr
oval
toaConst
it
uti
onal
AmendmentBil
l
.
 TheTwenty -
four
thConst
it
uti
onal AmendmentActwasi ntroducedi
nreacti
on
totheSupremeCourtsGol
’ aknathdeci
sion(1967),whi
chr ul
edthatt
he
Parl
iamenthasnoauthori
tytorevokeconst
itut
ionalf
reedomsbyamendi ng
theConsti
tuti
on.
TheConst
it
uti
on(
Twent
y-f
if
thAmendment
)Act
,1971
Thefundament
alri
ghttopr
opert
ywascurt
ail
ed.I
tbecameaconst
it
uti
onal
rightby
theamendmentofArt
icl
e31,nowremov
ed.
Theamendmentspecif
icall
ystat
edthatanylegal
authori
tycantaketheacqui
sit
ion
orr
equi
sit
ionofapropertyaft
erthepaymentofpropercompensati
on.
Throught hei
nsert
ionofnewAr t
icl
e31C,itpr
ovidedthatanyl
awpassedunder
Directi
vesofStat
ePol i
cyinAr
ti
cle39(b)and(c)cannotbechal
lengedonthegr
ound
thatitremovesorreducesanyofther
ight
saspr ovi
dedunderArti
cle14,
19or31.
29t
hAmendment
TheKeral
aLandRef
ormsAct,1963(Act1of1964)andot
hersuchl
andr
efor
m Act
s
wereaddedt
otheNint
hSchedule.

TheConst
it
uti
on(
42ndAmendmentAct
),1976
 I
nthePreambl
e,t
hreeaddi
ti
onal
ter
ms(
i.
e.soci
ali
st,
secul
ar,
andi
ntegr
it
y)
wer
eincl
uded.
 The42ndamendmentisthemostcompr ehensi
veamendmentinthehist
ory
ofIndi
anConst
it
uti
onalAmendments.I
tconsist
edof59clausesandcarr
ied
outsomanychangesthati
thasbeenter
medasa“ Mi
niConstit
uti
on”
.
 Theci
ti
zenshav
eaddedf
undament
aldut
ies(
newpar
tIVA)
.
 ThePr
esidentwasmadeboundbythecabi
net‘
sadvi
ce.Exceptf
or
admi
nist
rati
veandot
hermatt
erst
ri
bunals(
AddedPartXI
VA) .
 FrozetheLokSabhaseat
sandt hest
atelegisl
atur
esonthebasi
softhe1971
censusupto2001—Popul ati
onManagementMechani sm.Theconst
it
uti
onal
amendment sweremadewithoutj
udi
cial
r ev
iew.
 TheSupr
emeCour tandhighcourt
shadcurt
ail
edthepowerofj
udicial
revi
ew
andwri
tt
enjuri
sdi
cti
on.RaisedLokSabhat
enureandstat
elegi
slat
uresfr
om
5to6years.
 Addedthreenewguidel
i
nes,namel
yequalj
ust
iceandfr
eelegalassi
stance,
employeepart
ici
pat
ioni
nindust
rymanagementandenvi
ronmentalpr
otecti
on,
for
estsandwildl
i
fe.
 Facil
itateddeclar
ati
onofanational
emergencywit
hinapor
tionofIndia’
s
terr
it
or i
es.Ext
endedt heone-
ti
meper i
odofthel
awofthePresidentofaStat
e
from sixmont hstoay ear
.
 EmpoweredtheCentert
odepl
oyit
sar
medf
orcest
odeal
wit
haser
iousl
aw
andor
dersit
uati
oninanyst
ate.
 Shif
tedf ivesubjectsfrom t
hestatel
isttot
heconcurrentl
i
st,namel
y
education,forests,wil
dli
feandbir
dpr ot
ect
ion,wei
ghtsandmeasuresandthe
administrati
onofj usti
ce,const
it
uti
onandor gani
zat
ionofall
court
sexcept
theSupr emeCour tandthehighcourts.
  TheParl
iamentwasempower edtodeter
mi netheri
ght
sandr esponsi
bil
i
ties
ofi
tsmember sandcommi ssi
onsfrom t
imet oti
me.Establ
i
shedf ort
he
devel
opmentoftheJudi
cialSer
viceofal
lIndia.
TheConst
it
uti
on(
44t
hAmendmentAct
),1978
Replacedtheter
m‘inter
nal
dist
urbance’
wit
hthet
erm‘
armedr
ebel
l
ion’
concer
ning
thenational
emergency.
HasmadethePresi
dentdecl
areanat
ional
emer
gencyonl
yont
hecabi
net‘
swr
it
ten
r
ecommendati
on.
Hasrender
edsomeconst
it
uti
onal
prov
isi
onsf
oranat
ional
emer
gencyandt
hel
aw
oft
heConstit
uti
on.
Del
etedtheri
ghttopr
oper
tyf
rom t
heFundament
alRi
ght
sregi
ster
,andmadei
ta
l
egalri
ghti
nstead.
Pr
ovi
dedthat,
dur
inganati
onalemergency
,thef
undament
alr
ight
sguar
ant
eedby
Ar
ti
cles20and21cannotbesuspended.
Theorigi
nal
ter
m oft
heLokSabhaandt
hest
atel
egi
slat
ures(
i.
e.,
5year
s)was
rest
ored.
Rest
oredt
her
ulesi
nPar
li
amentandst
atel
egi
slat
uresonquor
um.
Refer
encet
otheBr
it
ishHouseofCommonsi
nthepar
li
ament
arypr
ivi
l
eges
provi
si
onswer
eomitt
ed.
Gavef
undamental
immuni
tyofthepubl
i
shi
ngoft
rut
hful
account
sofl
egi
slat
ivet
ri
als
andst
ateassembl
iesi
naj
ournal.
ThePr esidentwasall
owedtogi
vet
hecabinet‘
srecommendat
ionsbackoncef
or
reconsiderati
on.Ther
econsi
der
edopi
nion,
however,i
stobebi
ndingonthe
President.

TheConst
it
uti
on(
86t
hAmendmentAct
),2002
 I
nordertomaketheri
ghttofr
eeandcompul soryeducat
ionaf undamental
ri
ght,
theActi
nser
tsanewAr t
icl
e,namelyArti
cle21A,whichconferstheri
ght
tofr
eeandcompulsor
yeducati
ononallchil
drenagedbetween6and14y ear
s.
TheLawamendst heConst
it
uti
oninPart
-II
I,
Par t-
IV,
andPar t
-I
V( A).
 Oneoft hemostcr i
ticalchanges,wi
ththeaidofgovernmentsuppor t
,the
governmentforcedpr i
vateschoolst
oaccept25per centoftheircl
asssize
fr
om sociall
yvulnerableordepriv
edclassesinsoci
etybyar andom all
ocati
on
process.Thi
smov ewast akentoseektoof f
erqual
ityeducati
ont oevery
one.