Fundamental Rights

Part III of the Constitution of India, spanning Articles 12 to 35, constitutes a comprehensive and 'Justiciable' list of Fundamental Rights, often referred to as the 'Magna Carta' of the Indian Constitution. These Fundamental Rights serve as a cornerstone for promoting the ideals of political democracy. 

Introduction 

• Fundamental Rights are the fundamental human rights accorded to all citizens, essential for safeguarding their rights and liberties against government overreach. 
• The inspiration for the concept of Fundamental Rights is drawn from the American Constitution's Bill of Rights. 

Constitutional Provision 

• The Fundamental Rights in the Constitution are influenced by the Bill of Rights of 1791. 
• Enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, from Articles 12 to 35, these rights protect citizens, ensuring public order and guarding against oppressive state regulations. 
• Part III of the Constitution is aptly labeled as the 'Magna Carta of India,' defining Fundamental Rights as basic human rights for all citizens. 
• These rights earned their name due to the judicial protection they receive under the Constitution. 
• Initially, the Constitution provided for seven Fundamental Rights. However, the Right to Property (Article 31) was later removed from the list of Fundamental Rights. 
• Following the 44th Amendment Act of 1975, the current number of Fundamental Rights has been reduced to six. These include: 
  • Right to Equality (Articles 14-18) 
  • Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32) 
  • Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22) 
  • Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29 and 30) 
  • Right against Exploitation (Articles 23 and 24) 
  • Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28) 

Characteristics of Fundamental Rights 

• Fundamental Rights, as enshrined in the Constitution, are provided to all individuals without discrimination, emphasizing equality and dignity in the broader interest and unity of the nation. These rights are fundamental, constituting the basic law of the country, guaranteed and essential for the intellectual, moral, and spiritual development of the individual. 
• Being inalienable, Fundamental Rights cannot be revoked from citizens during normal times. 
• They encompass both individual and group rights, encompassing concepts such as equality before the law, freedom of speech, and freedom of association. 
• The inclusion of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution aims to establish a government governed by laws and not individuals.  
• While certain rights are exclusive to citizens (Articles 15, 16, 19, and 30), others apply to all individuals, whether citizens or foreigners. 
• Fundamental Rights safeguard against arbitrary state actions, and some extend protection against actions by private individuals (Articles 15(2), 17, 20, and 21).  
• Although not sacrosanct or permanent, Parliament can modify or repeal them only through a Constitutional Amendment Act, not an ordinary act. 
• During the operation of a National Emergency, Fundamental Rights can be suspended, with the exception of those guaranteed by Articles 21 and 24.  
• Additionally, the suspension of the six rights protected by Article 32 is limited to emergencies declared due to war or external aggression (external emergency). 
• In cases of infringement, any aggrieved person has the right to directly approach the Supreme Court, which serves as the guardian and defender of these rights. 

Distinguishing Fundamental Rights from Ordinary Legal Rights 

• Ordinary laws serve to safeguard and enforce ordinary legal rights, whereas Fundamental Rights are inherently guaranteed and protected by the Constitution itself.  
• While ordinary legal rights can be altered through parliamentary legislation, changing Fundamental Rights requires a constitutional amendment. 
• Fundamental Rights are beyond the reach of any government entity; no part of the government can act in opposition to these rights. 

Historical Evolution of Fundamental Rights 

• The concept of Fundamental Rights traces back to Britain in 1215, when King John was compelled to sign the Magna Carta, recognizing ancient liberties.  
• Subsequently, in 1689, the British people compelled the emperor to sign the Bill of Rights, granting rights to the public over time. 
• The constitutional acknowledgment of human rights began in France in 1789, followed by the announcement of the Charter of Rights in the American Constitution in 1791. 
• In 1925, Annie Besant's 'Commonwealth of India Bill' and the Nehru Report of 1928 included provisions for Fundamental Rights. 
• The demand for Fundamental Rights was reiterated by the Indian National Congress in its manifesto during the Karachi Session of 1931, presided over by Vallabhbhai Patel. 
• The Sapru Committee (1944-45) advocated for two categories of Fundamental Rights: justiciable and non-justiciable. 

Declaration of Human Rights in the General Assembly of the United Nations 

• The comprehensive declaration of human rights was endorsed by the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948, comprising a total of 30 Articles. 
• Notably, Article 26 addresses the right to education, Article 21 emphasizes the right to receive public service with equality, and Article 25 mentions the right to food. 

Nature of Fundamental Rights 

• Fundamental Rights are not absolute or unrestricted; they are subject to limitations.  
• The Constitution imposes specific restrictions on individuals in the exercise of Fundamental Rights, and the Parliament is authorized to impose reasonable restrictions on these rights. 
• In cases of violation, individuals can directly approach the Supreme Court and High Court. 
• Grounds for restricting Fundamental Rights include: 
  • In the interest of the sovereignty and security of India. 
  • In the interest of public order, morality, and decency. 
  • In the promotion of the well-being of weaker sections in society, including women, children, SCs, STs, and OBCs. 
  • In maintaining friendly relationships with other foreign nations. 

Definition of State (Article 12) 

• Article 12 defines the term "state" for the purposes of Part III.  
• It includes the Government and Parliament of India, the Government and Legislature of States, all local authorities, and all other authorities under the control of the Government of India. 
• Therefore, all public authorities, elected representatives, judges, bureaucrats, autonomous institutions, public corporations, private bodies and trusts, government universities, and educational bodies fall under the definition of the state. 

Definition of Laws (Article 13) 

• Under Article 13, all laws in force in the Territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, to the extent of inconsistency with the provisions of this part, shall be declared void. 
• The state is prohibited from making any law that takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this part.  
• Any law contravening this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be declared void. 

The term "law" includes 

• Any ordinance, order, by-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom, or usage having in the Territory of India the force of law. 
• Laws passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the Territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution, not previously repealed, regardless of whether such law or any part thereof is in operation. 
• The Supreme Court judgment brought about the Constitutional Amendment Act and inserted the phrase "Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this Constitution made under Article 368 
• "Article 13 declares that a Constitutional Amendment is not a law and cannot be challenged. 
• However, the Supreme Court ruled in the KesaVananda Bharati Case (1973) that a Constitutional Amendment can be challenged on the grounds of violating a Fundamental Right forming part of the basic structure of the Constitution and can be declared void. 

Judicial Review and Fundamental Rights 

• Judicial review is the power granted to the Supreme Court and High Courts of India to declare a law unconstitutional if it is inconsistent with any provisions of Part III of the Constitution, to the extent of the contravention. 
• Article 13 provides for the judicial review of all legislation in India if it contravenes any of the Fundamental Rights outlined in Part III of the Constitution. 
• The principle of judicial review has been adopted from the United States of America. 

Doctrine of Prediction 

• The impact of a Fundamental Right is not retrospective; rather, its future effect is prospective. 
• The influence of Fundamental Rights on laws existing before the enforcement of the Constitution of India will be effective from the date the Fundamental Rights come into force. 
• Concerning actions undertaken before the Constitution's enforcement, there exists a pre-constitutional layer.  
• Therefore, rights and obligations arising before the Constitution's enforcement can be enforced under pre-constitutional laws, even if they contravene fundamental rights. 

Doctrine of Separation 

• If any part of a state-made law is inconsistent with or contrary to a Fundamental Right, it will not be declared entirely unconstitutional and void.  
• Instead, the specific part conflicting with the Fundamental Right will be declared void, provided it is severable. 

Doctrine of Severability 

• Among the principles associated with Fundamental Rights, the doctrine of waiver holds significant importance.  
• According to this doctrine, an individual granted Fundamental Rights cannot renounce them. 
• The court highlights the potential misuse of this principle due to inadequate awareness. 

Doctrine of Eclipse 

• According to the Doctrine of Eclipse, laws existing in India before the Constitution's enforcement that are inconsistent with Fundamental Rights do not expire but become inactive. 
• Such laws are subject to the influence of Fundamental Rights. 

Court Decisions Regarding Articles 13 and 368 

• In the Shankari Prasad Case (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament has the authority to amend any Constitution provision, including Fundamental Rights, through Article 368. 
• However, in the Golak Nath Case (1967), the Supreme Court reversed its earlier stance, stating that Fundamental Rights are transcendental and not subject to amendment. 
• The Kesa Vananda Bharati Case (1973) introduced a balanced approach, establishing the basic structure doctrine. 
• According to this doctrine, Fundamental Rights can be amended by Parliament without disrupting the Constitution's basic structure. 
• The 42nd Constitutional Amendment provision was nullified by the court's decision in the Minerva Mills Federation of India in 1980.  
• The court asserted its authority to review amendments to protect the Constitution's basic goals. 

Classification of Fundamental Rights 

• The original Constitution of India outlined seven Fundamental Rights, but currently, citizens are provided with six Fundamental Rights.  
• The right to property, initially under Article 31, was removed by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. 
• The Constitution of India classifies the Fundamental Rights under six groups as follows 

Classification of Fundamental Rights 

Fundamental Right Available to Foreigners and Indian Citizens 

Right to Equality (Articles 14-18) 

• The significance of the right to equality is paramount in a society marked by social and economic disparities. 
• All individuals are inherently equal, and accordingly, they should be treated without discrimination. 
• This principle has found acceptance in the Constitution. 
• Article 14 addresses the right to equality, with a detailed description provided below: 

Equality Before the Law and Equal Protection of Law (Article 14) 

• The state is prohibited from denying equality before the law or equal protection of the laws to any person within the Territory of India.  
• The term "person" has a broad definition, encompassing constitutional corporations, companies, registered societies, and so forth. 

Difference between Equality before Laws and Equal Protection of Laws 

Exceptions 

• According to Article 361(1), the President or the Governor of a state is immune from court accountability regarding the exercise of their office powers, duties, or any acts performed in the course of those responsibilities. 
• During their term of office, neither the President nor the Governor of a state can face criminal proceedings in any court. 
• Courts are barred from issuing arrest or imprisonment processes against the President or the Governor throughout their term in office. 
• Civil proceedings seeking relief against the President or the Governor for acts in their personal capacity, whether occurring before or after assuming office, cannot be initiated during their term.  
• However, such proceedings may commence two months after delivering a written notice specifying the nature of the proceedings, cause of action, and relevant details to the President or Governor. 
• According to international law, visiting heads of government and foreign diplomats stationed in the country are not under the jurisdiction of local courts. 

Rule of Law 

• Rule of Law, introduced by AV Dicey, the British jurist, comprises three key elements: 
  • Absence of arbitrary power, ensuring that no individual can be punished except for a violation of the law. 
  • Equality before the law, emphasizing equal subjection of all citizens. 
  • The primacy of individual rights, where the Constitution is a reflection of these rights. 
  • While the first and second elements are applicable in the Indian system, the third one is not. In India, individual rights find their source in the Constitution. 
  • In alignment with John Locke's perspective, he asserted that "where there is no law, there is no liberty." Thus, the existence of law is crucial for safeguarding liberty, as it is through law that liberty is preserved. 

Prohibition of Discrimination on Certain Grounds (Article 15) 

• Article 15 prohibits the state from discriminating against a citizen based solely on race, caste, religion, sex, or place of birth.  
• The inclusion of the word "only" emphasizes that discrimination cannot solely rely on these grounds. It's crucial to note that the right guaranteed by Article 15 is exclusive to citizens. 
• Article 15(2) ensures that no citizen faces disability, liability, restriction, or condition solely on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.  
• This applies to access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, places of public entertainment, as well as the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads, and public resorts funded wholly or partially by state funds.  
• This provision extends to prohibiting discrimination by both the state and private individuals. 
• Article 15(3) empowers the state to establish special provisions for the protection of women and children. 
• Furthermore, Article 15(1), introduced by the 1st Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951, grants the state the authority to make special provisions safeguarding the interests of backward classes. 
• The 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2005 introduced a new clause, 15(5), which mandates affirmative actions for socially and educationally backward classes in educational institutions, excluding minority educational institutions. 
• In 2019, the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act brought in a 10% reservation for the Economically Weaker Sections of Society in admission to Central Government-run educational institutions and private educational institutions, with the exception of minority educational institutions. 
• Additionally, Article 15(6) was incorporated by the 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2019. 

Equality of Opportunity in Matters of Public Employment (Article 16) 

• Article 16 stipulates that no citizen shall face discrimination solely based on religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, or residence, rendering them ineligible for any employment or office under the state.  
• In essence, the Constitution ensures equality of opportunity. 
• The state holds the authority to define the qualifications, and no other grounds should warrant non-eligibility.  
• The Supreme Court, in the Indra Sawhney's Case (commonly known as the Mandal Commission Case, 1992), outlined key points summarizing the law on reservation: 
• Under Article 16(4), reservation can be implemented in favor of backward classes concerning employment. 
• In 1990, VP Singh's Government announced a 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs. 
• Backwardness under Article 16(4) is primarily social and need not be both social and educational. The reservation percentage should not exceed 50%. 
• The Supreme Court affirmed the constitutional validity of the 27% reservation for OBCs. 
• The creamy layer concept was introduced, incorporating income and post criteria to prevent advanced sections within backward classes from exploiting the OBC quota. 
• A permanent statutory body is to be established to address complaints of over-inclusion and under-inclusion in the OBC list. 

Mandal Commission and Creamy Layer 

• The Mandal Commission advocated a 27% reservation in government jobs for Other Backward Classes (OBCs), specifically those categorized as Non-Creamy Layer. 
• The Creamy Layer within the OBC group should be excluded from the roster of reservation beneficiaries.  
• In 1993, the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) was established through an act of Parliament. 
• The creation of NCBC aimed to investigate the conditions and challenges faced by socially and educationally backward classes, providing suitable recommendations. 
• The NCBC attained constitutional status through the Constitutional 102nd Amendment Act of 2018. 
• The court has designated under the Creamy Layer those individuals from backward classes who are economically affluent. Such individuals are ineligible for reservation benefits. 
• By the 7th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1995, Article 16(4(a)) was introduced, allowing for reservation in promotion for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. 
• The Constitution's 1st Amendment Act of 2000 added a new Clause (4-B) to Article 16, aiming to remove the 50% limit for SCs/STs in backlog vacancies that remained unfilled due to the unavailability of eligible candidates from these categories. 
• The 5th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2001 introduced provisions for consequential seniority for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in cases of reservation in promotion. 
• Under Article 16, the protection against discrimination is specifically related to employment and appointment under the state. 
• As per the Nagarayan vs. Union of India decision in 2006, the 77th and 85th Constitutional Amendment Acts were challenged by general caste employees in the Supreme Court. However, the court upheld the reservation of promotion, mandating the fulfillment of the following three conditions before implementing promotion reservations: 
  • Proof of the authenticity of backwardness. 
  • Inadequate representation of that class. 
  • Reservation must not compromise the overall efficiency of the administration. 
  • The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2019 amended Article I, allowing the government to reserve up to 10% of all posts for the Economically Weaker Sections of Society. 
  • The 10th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2019 extended the reservation of seats for members from Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies by a period of 10 years. 
• Exceptions to the general rule of equality of opportunity in public employment include: 
  • Parliament's authority to prescribe residence as a condition for certain employment or appointment in a State, Union Territory, local authority, or other authority. 
  • The state's power to provide reservation of appointments or posts in favor of any backward class that is not adequately represented in state services. 
  • Legislation permitting that the incumbent of an office related to a religious or denominational institution should belong to a particular religion. 
  • The state's permission to reserve up to 10% of appointments or posts in favor of any Economically Weaker Sections of citizens. 

Abolition of Untouchability (Article 17) 

• Untouchability and its practice in any form are prohibited, and enforcing any disability arising from untouchability is an offense punishable by law. 
• While the Constitution doesn't prescribe specific punishment, it empowers Parliament under Article 35 and Article 3 to establish legal penalties. 
• In this context, Parliament enacted the Untouchability (Offences) Act of 1955, later amended in 1976 and renamed the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. 
• A special law, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was enacted for the protection of SCs and STs.  
• This law aims to impose stringent punitive measures to serve as a deterrent against brutalities. However, the Act doesn't provide a definition for Untouchability. 
• The Supreme Court interprets Untouchability beyond its literal or grammatical sense, understanding it as a historically developed practice.  
• This includes preventing dalits from accessing public resources like common water sources, barring entry to places of worship, and using derogatory names.  
• Offenders convicted under this Act are also disqualified from running for Union or State Legislature elections. 

Abolition of Titles (Article 18)

• Article 18 makes four provisions regarding the abolition of titles: 
  • No title, except military or academic distinctions, shall be conferred by the state. 
  • No Indian citizen shall accept any title from any foreign state. 
  • Non-citizens, while holding an office of profit or trust under the state, cannot accept any title from a foreign state without the President's consent. 
  • Individuals holding an office of profit or trust under the state cannot accept any present, emolument, or office from or under any foreign state without the President's consent. 
  • National Awards like Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan, and Padma Shri are not governed by Article 18, allowing the state to confer these awards on eminent personalities. 
  • However, British Knighthood (Sir) is considered a title, and no Indian citizen can accept it. 
  • The above makes it evident that hereditary titles of nobility such as Maharaja, Raj Bahadur, Rai Bahadur, Rai Saheb, Dewan Bahadur, etc., bestowed by colonial states, are prohibited by Article 18 as they contradict the principle of equal status for all citizens. 
  • Article 51(A) of the Constitution outlines Fundamental Duties for every citizen. Recognizing excellence in the performance of these duties, honors, and decorations are permissible, and they do not violate the provisions of Article 18. 
  • In the Balaji Raghavan Case, the Supreme Court clarified the distinction between Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards, stating that they are awards and not titles. 

Right to Freedom (Articles 19 to 22)

• Right to Freedom (Articles 19 to 22) encompasses personal liberty, considered the most crucial among all Fundamental Rights. Articles 19 to 22, focusing on personal liberties, serve as the cornerstone of the chapter on Fundamental Rights. 
• The six freedom rights under Article 19 (1) of the Constitution provide Indian citizens with the following freedoms: 
• Article 19(1)(a) - Right to freedom of speech and expression, encompassing the right to express one's ideas, beliefs, and convictions without any restraint, whether verbal or in any other form. 

The Supreme Court held that the freedom of speech and expression includes the following: 

• Right to propagate one's views as well as the views of others. 
• Freedom of the press. 
• Freedom of commercial advertisements. 
• Right against tapping of telephonic conversation. 
• Right to telecast, i.eThe government has no monopoly on electronic media. 
• Right against bandh called by a political party or organization. 
• Right to know about government activities. 
• Freedom of silence. 
• Right against imposition of pre-censorship on a newspaper. 
• Right to demonstration or picketing but not right to strike. 
• Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, permitting public gatherings, protests, and processions on public property, but without protection for disruptive or violent gatherings.  
• Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code empowers a Magistrate to restrain assemblies posing risks to public order. 
• Article 19(1)(c) ensures the right to form associations, unions, or cooperative societies, allowing the creation of organizations such as trade unions, businesses, partnerships, societies, clubs, and political parties. 
• Article 19(1)(d) provides the right to move freely within the Territory of India, covering internal movement and external travel with the right to return. The state can impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of the public or to protect Scheduled Tribes. 
• Article 19(1)(e) guarantees the right to reside and settle in any part of the Territory of India, with restrictions in Tribal Areas to safeguard the culture and customs of Scheduled Tribes. Restrictions can be imposed for the general public interest or to protect Scheduled Tribes. 
• Article 19(1)(g) secures the right to practice any profession or carry on any occupation, trade, or business, excluding immoral or dangerous professions. The state can impose restrictions in the public interest and establish qualifications for professional practice. 
• The right to property, initially part of the constitutional framework, was eliminated by the 44th Constitutional Amendment in 1978 and repositioned under Article 300A as a legal right accessible to all individuals. 
• These six rights are safeguarded only against state actions, not private individuals, and are exclusively available to citizens and shareholders of a company. The state retains the authority to impose reasonable restrictions on the enjoyment of these six rights. 
• The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act in 1978 introduced Article 361(a), granting newspapers the freedom to publish proceedings of Parliament and legislatures. 
• In landmark Supreme Court decisions, such as Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union of India (1984), the government was directed to eliminate bonded labor. The case of Kiranjit Rai vs State of Rajasthan (1995) established that paying wages below the minimum during famines resembled forced labor. 

Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offenses 

• Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offenses (Article 20) shields individuals from three types of convictions: 
  • Ex-post Facto Legislation: No person shall be convicted of any offense except for a violation of a law in force at the time of the act. The penalty cannot exceed that applicable under the law at the time. 
  • Double Jeopardy: No person can be prosecuted for the same offense more than once, applicable to judicial proceedings. 
  • Prohibition Against Self-incrimination: An accused cannot be compelled to be a witness against oneself, but this doesn't grant absolute silence. The accused is expected to cooperate with investigating authorities. 
  • Article 20 cannot be suspended during an emergency. Certain laws, like the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), place the burden of proving innocence on the accused. 

Protection of Life and Personal Liberty 

• Protection of Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21) states that no person shall be deprived of life and personal liberty except according to the established legal procedure.  
• This right applies to both citizens and non-citizens and cannot be suspended during an emergency. 
• The Supreme Court, interpreting Article 21 liberally, has inferred several rights, including the right to a dignified life, free education up to 14 years of age, protection against cruel punishment, free legal aid, a speedy trial, health of workers, denial of wages, a healthy environment, shelter for workers, the right to travel abroad, privacy, and the right to marry the person of one's choice. 
• As per Article 21, the use of the 3rd-degree method by the police violates Article 21. 
• Prevention of sexual harassment of working women falls under Article 21, as established by the Supreme Court in the Vishaka Case.  
• Euthanasia and its consideration under Article 21 witnessed a shift in the Supreme Court's stance.  
• Initially, in 1994, in the case of P Rathinam vs Union of India, the Supreme Court recognized the right of a person to die. However, in 1996, the Court reversed its decision, stating that the right to die is not a Fundamental Right under Article 21.  
• In March 2011, the Supreme Court permitted passive euthanasia in the Aruna Shanbaug Case. The court affirmed this decision in March 2018, acknowledging the right to death under Article 21. 
• In the KS Puttaswamy Case (2017), the Supreme Court declared that the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed in Article 21 implicitly includes the right to privacy. 

Other significant judgments 

Other significant judgments include the decriminalization of homosexuality by striking off parts of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, deemed violative of LGBTQ community Fundamental Rights. 

The Supreme Court also deemed unconstitutional Section 497 of the IPC, which criminalized adultery, citing violations of Article 21 and Article 14.  

In the Shayara Bano Case (2017), the practice of Triple Talaq was declared unconstitutional, violating Article 14, Article 15, Article 21, and Article 25 (Religious right). 

Even animals have rights against torture,  

Even animals have rights against torture, as stated by the Supreme Court in May 2014, banning Jallikattu (bull fighting) and bullock cart racing in Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. 

The difference between Procedure Established by Law and Due Process of Law is notable: 

Procedure Established by Law: 

• Inspired by the British Constitution. 
• Upholds the supremacy of Parliament. 
• Judiciary lacks the power to interpret the reasonableness of laws. 

Due Process of Law: 

• Inspired by the American Constitution. 
• Judiciary can declare laws unconstitutional if they violate the principles of natural justice. 

Right to Education 

• Article 21A introduces the Right to Education, obligating the state to provide free and compulsory education to children aged 6 to 14 years.  
• It was added by the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act in 2002, also incorporating a Fundamental Duty under Article 51A(k) to provide educational opportunities. 

Protection Against Arrest and Detention in Certain Cases 

• Article 22 protects persons arrested or detained under ordinary law, granting them the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest and the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner. 
• The right to be presented before a Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest is a crucial safeguard.  
• However, individuals arrested under preventive detention are not entitled to this right. Instead, they have the following rights: 
  • Right not to be detained beyond three months. 
  • Right to be informed of the grounds of detention. 
  • Right to make a representation against the detention order. 
  • Foreigners and citizens detained under the Preventive Detention Act do not benefit from these safeguards. 
  • Judicial custody involves holding the accused in prison rather than a lock-up. During judicial custody, police officers cannot interrogate the suspect without court approval. State Governments have their own rules for releasing prisoners on parole. 

Preventive detention 

• Preventive detention refers to holding a person without trial or conviction, aiming to prevent future offenses. It is a precautionary measure based on suspicion.  
• The Parliament has enacted various laws for preventive detention, including the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 (expired in 1969), Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), 1971 (repealed in 1978), National Security Act (NSA), 1980, and the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA), 1985 (repealed in 1995). 

Right Against Exploitation (Articles 23 and 24) 

Prohibition of Traffic in Human Beings and Forced Labour (Article 23) 

• Traffic in human beings, which involves selling and buying individuals like goods, is considered an offense punishable by law. 
• Parliament has enacted the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, and the Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976, to punish offenses related to exploitation. 
• Article 23 allows the state to impose compulsory service for public purposes, such as military or social service. 

Prohibition of Employment of Children in Factories, etc. (Article 24) 

• Article 24 prohibits the employment of children under 14 years in hazardous jobs to ensure public health and safety. 
• In the IC Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu Case, the Supreme Court emphasized the protection of economic, social, and humanitarian rights of illegally working children. 
• The government enacted the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act in 2016, completely prohibiting the employment of children under 14 years and restricting the employment of adolescents (14 to 18) in hazardous occupations. 
• The Act declares child labor as a cognizable offense with penalties of up to ₹50,000 and a jail term of two years. 

• Article 23 prohibits human trafficking, forced labor, and similar forms of exploitation. 
• These provisions aim to safeguard individuals, especially children, from exploitative practices and ensure their well-being. 

Right to Freedom of Religion Articles 25 to 28) 

• India is a secular state, not an atheist state. The state protects all the religions; but interferes with none. It believes in the ancient Indian doctrine Sarva Dharma Sama Bhava 

Freedom of Conscience and Free Profession, Practice and Propagation of Religion (Article 25) 

• Under article 25, subject to public order, morality and health, all persons are equally entitled to the freedom of conscience and the right to profess practice and propagate religion.  
• The right to propagate does not mean alluring a person to join any religion. 
• Article 25(1) does not give the right to convert, but only the right to spread the tenets of one's own religion. 
• Freedom of Conscience Absolute inner freedom of an individual to Mould his/her own relation with God or Creatures in whatever manner he/she likes. 
• Kight to Profess To declare freely and openly one's faith and belief. 
• Kight to Practice performing the prescribed religious duties, rites and rituals and to exhibit his religious beliefs. 
• Kight to Propagate Spread and publicise his/her religious views for the edification of others. It only indicates persuasion and exposition without any element of coercion. The rights are available to both citizens and non-citizens. 
• The two explanations mentioned in article 25 
• Being considered a part of Sikh religion, permission to wear and carry a sword. 
• Sikh, Jain and Buddhist religions are also included under Hindu. 

Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs (Article 26) 

• The article 26 grants freedom to manage religious affairs subject to public order, morality and health and every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the following right: 
  • To establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes. To manage its own affairs in the matters of religion. 
  • To own and acquire movable and immovable property and to administer such property in accordance with law. 
  • The court has the right to decide whether a particular ritual or method of worship is necessary according to the beliefs of that. religion or not and if a particular practice is against public health or morality or is not an integral part of religious practice and if it violates the law regulating social, economic or political, the court can intervene. 
  • State regulations cannot interfere with matters that are essentially religious. 

Freedom as to Payment of Taxes for Promotion of any Particular Religion (Article 27) 

• No person shall be compelled to pay any tax for religious purposes. 
• It is article 27 that spells out the secular character of a state. It means the state does not recognize any religion as the official religion. It regards religion as the personal affairs of the individuals and does not interfere in religious belief and faith. 
• The provision prohibits only levy of a tax and not a fee. This is because the purpose of a fee is to control secular administration of religious institutions and not to promote or maintain religion. 

Freedom from Attending Religious Instruction (Article 28) 

• Article 2grants freedom as to the attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions. 
• Article 28 divides educational institution into four categories: 
  • Wholly maintained by the state. 
  • Recognized by the state. 
  • Receiving aid out of the state funds. 
  • Administered by the state but established under a religious endowment. 

In the first case, there can be no religious instructions whatsoever; in the second and third case, religious instructions can be permitted, but the pupils cannot be compelled to attend such instructions. In the fourth case, there is no restriction whatsoever, as far as religious instructions are concerned. 

Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29 and 30) 

• Article 29and 3of the Indian Constitution deals with the Cultural and Educational Rights. 

Protection of Interests of Minorities (Article 29) 

• Under Article 29 any section of the citizens residing in the Territory of India or any part there of having a distinct language, script or culture of its own and shall have the right to conserve the same. 
• No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the state or receiving aid out of state funds on grounds only of religion, race, caste, language or any of them. 
• The Supreme Court has observed that the right to administration is not the right to maladministration.  
• The university can put basic qualifications for the selection of teachers. 
• The political speeches or promises made for the conservation of the language of a section of the citizens does not amount to corrupt practice under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 
• The rights under this article grant protection to both majority as well as minorities. 
• Minority's that group, which has its own language or religion and on the basis of numbers in any part of the country or in the whole country, is smaller than any other group. Such minority groups have the right to preserve and develop their own language, script and culture. 

Right of Minorities to Establish and Administer Educational Institutions (Article 30) 

• All minorities, whether based on religion or language, shall have the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. 
• It provides religious, educational and cultural institutions the right to own, possess and dispose of immovable property. 
• This article also includes the right of minorities to impart education to their children in its own language. 
• As per Article 15(5) inserted under the 93rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 2005, the state can reserve seats in Favour of SCs, STs and OBCs candidates. For admission in educational institutions whether aided or unaided out of the state funds, except the minority educational Institutions.  
• The state shall give due compensation in the event of acquisition of such property. 
• The 44th Amendment Act introduced provisions for safeguarding the rights of minorities. These provisions, specified in Article, exclusively apply to minorities, whether based on religion or language. 

Right to Property 

• The right to property was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights and reclassified as a Legal Right under Article 300(A) in Part XI of the Constitution by the 44th Amendment Act in 1978. Consequently, the Constitution now comprises only six Fundamental Rights. 
• The Fundamental Rights form a cohesive framework guaranteeing the basic structure of human rights and place negative obligations on the state, restraining it from infringing upon individual liberties in diverse dimensions. 

Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32) 

• Article 32 establishes an institutional framework within the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.  
• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar referred to this article as the "Fundamental of Fundamental Rights" and the "heart and soul of the Constitution." 

Writ 

• To enforce Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court, under Article 32, is authorized to issue various forms of writs. The concept of issuing writs is derived from the UK. 
• A writ, in this context, signifies an order issued under authority. While Article 32(3) empowers Parliament to legislate on the issuance of writs, this authority remains unutilized. Consequently, only the Supreme Court under Article 32 and High Courts under Article 226 possess the jurisdiction to issue writs. 

The principal forms of writs are as follows: 

Habeas Corpus 

• Literally translates to "have the body," signifying the production of an individual before the court. 
• Empowers the court to scrutinize the legality of arrest or detention, safeguarding personal liberty against arbitrary actions by both the state and private entities. 
• Allows the aggrieved person to seek compensation for such actions. 

Mandamus 

• Literally means "we command." 
• Issued against public authorities, officers, and inferior courts to compel them to perform a duty they are obligated to but have neglected. 
• Cannot be issued against the President and Governors, and it does not address private rights. 

Prohibition 

• Involves forbidding. 
• Issued by higher courts to restrain lower courts or quasi-judicial bodies exceeding their judicial authority. 
• Aims to confine lower courts or quasi-judicial bodies within their prescribed jurisdiction. 
• Unlike Mandamus, Prohibition is specific to judicial or quasi-judicial authorities. 

Certiorari 

• Means "to be certified." 
• Issued annul the orders of lower courts or decisions of tribunals that surpass their jurisdiction. 
• Ensures proper exercise of jurisdiction by inferior courts or tribunals, preventing usurpation. 

Quo Warranto 

• Literally means "by what authority." 
• Issued to verify the qualification of an individual holding a public office. 
• Alongside the typical writs for Fundamental Rights violations, the judiciary has progressively strengthened these rights. 
• The principle of Locus Standi applies exclusively to the writs of Mandamus, Prohibition, and Certiorari—meaning only the aggrieved person is entitled to seek these particular writs. 

Difference Between Jurisdiction of Supreme Court and High Court Regarding Writs 

• The Supreme Court's jurisdiction to issue writs under Article 32 is confined to the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whereas High Courts can issue them for other violations of the Constitution beyond Fundamental Rights. 
• The Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction extends to the entire Territory of India, while High Courts' jurisdiction is limited to their respective territories. 
• The Supreme Court is obligated to implement Fundamental Rights and cannot suggest alternative remedies, while High Courts have the discretion to implement or not implement Fundamental Rights. 

Power of Parliament to Make Laws for Armed Forces 

• Article 33 empowers Parliament to restrict or abrogate Fundamental Rights for members of the armed forces, paramilitary forces, police forces, intelligence agencies, and analogous forces. 
• The objective is to ensure the proper discharge of duties and maintain discipline. This power is exclusively vested in Parliament.  
• A law enacted under Article 33 can exclude court martial from the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts concerning the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. 

Armed Forces Special Power Act (AFSPA 1958) 

• This parliamentary Act grants the armed forces authority to maintain public order in disturbed areas, including the use of force or open fire after giving a warning. 
• Section 3 of AFSPA allows the declaration of an area as disturbed due to differences or disputes between various groups. 

Martial Law and Fundamental Rights 

• Article34 imposes restrictions on Fundamental Rights during the enforcement of martial law in any area within the Territory of India. 
• Martial law, imposed under extraordinary circumstances like war or insurrection, grants military authorities' extraordinary powers. However, the Supreme Court held that Habeas Corpus is not suspended during martial law. 

Legislation Effecting Certain Fundamental Rights 

• Article 35 specifies that the power to make laws for certain Fundamental Rights resides solely in Parliament, not in State Legislatures. 
• These rights include prescribing residence as a condition for specific employment or appointments in a Union Territory or local authority. 
•  Authorizes lower courts, apart from the Supreme Court and High Courts, to issue directives, orders, and various forms of writs. 
• Restricts or eliminates the application of Fundamental Rights for members of the armed forces, police forces, etc. 
• Grants indemnity to any government or individual for actions taken during the implementation of martial law in any area. 
• Prescribes penalties for acts involving untouchability. 
• Prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labor. 

Suspension of Fundamental Rights 

• The Constitution includes provisions for the automatic suspension of Fundamental Rights in specific situations, such as during a National Emergency under Article 352 (i.e., war or external aggression). 
• Under Article 358, when a National Emergency is declared based on war or external aggression (excluding armed rebellion), Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are automatically suspended. 
• Article 359 empowers the President to suspend any or all Fundamental Rights by issuing a separate proclamation during a National Emergency.  
• The 44th Amendment Act, 1978 prohibits the suspension of Articles 20 and 21 (protection in respect of conviction for offenses and protection of life and personal liberty, respectively) even during a National Emergency. 

Rights Outside Part III in the Constitution 

These rights are also referred to as Constitutional, Legal, and Non-Fundamental Rights. They include: 

Article 265: No tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. 

Article 300: Right to Property. 

Article 301: Freedom of Trade, Commerce, and Intercourse. 

Article 326: Right to Vote.