The Fundamental Rights

Meaning of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution are a set of basic rights and freedoms essential for every person. They play a crucial role in enabling individuals to  live with dignity and exercise their freedom to create a constructive and progressive society. These rights are enshrined in Part III, from Article 14 to Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. They are not absolute rights as they can be subjected to reasonable restrictions set by the constitution itself, the judiciary, or the legislature.

Fundamental Rights express the progressive ideas of the framers of the Indian Constitution and outline the ways in which a free and just society can be achieved. They serve as a barrier to protect citizens from potential abuse of power by the government. Such protections matter for every individual to achieve their fullest potential and contribute to the collective well-being of society. These rights are meant to safeguard the rule of law and guarantee that each and every person is treated equally by the government. 

Constitution of India

Originally, the Constitution of India in Part III provided 7 types of Fundamental Rights. However, the Right to Property (Article 31) was deleted from the List of fundamental rights by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978. It is now made a legal right under Article 300-A in Part XII of the Constitution. So, at present, there are only six Fundamental Rights.  they are:

• Right to Equality: (Articles 14 to Article 18) It ensures equality before the law and prohibits discrimination on various grounds, such as religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. It also states that there shall be equality of employment opportunities for all citizens or opportunities of appointments in public office. It also abolishes untouchability and all titles except military and academic.
• Article 14: This article states that the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India. This means that the law applies equally to everyone and that everyone is entitled to the same legal remedies for the violation of their rights. It also means that the state cannot make any law or take any action that is arbitrary, unreasonable, or discriminatory.
• Article 15: This article prohibits the state from discriminating against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth, or any of them. It also empowers the state to make special provisions for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes. It prohibits discrimination on the above grounds in access to public places, such as shops, restaurants, hotels, etc.
• Article 16: This article provides for equality of opportunity for all citizens in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the state. It prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth, residence, or any of them in public employment. It also empowers the state to make reservations in favour of any backward class of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes in public employment, if they are not adequately represented in the services under the state.
• Article 17: This article abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form. It also makes the enforcement of any disability arising out of untouchability a punishable offence under the law.
• Article 18: This article abolishes all titles, such as Sir, Rai Bahadur, etc., except those conferred by the state for military or academic distinctions. It prohibits any citizen of India from accepting any title from any foreign state. And also prohibits any person who is not a citizen of India from accepting any title from the state without the consent of the President.
• Right to Freedom:  This set includes (Articles 19 to Article 22) Right to freedom provides protection of six rights regarding freedom of i) Speech and expression, ii) assembly iii) association iv) movement v) residence vi) profession. 
  • Article 19: This article protects six freedoms related to speech, expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. These freedoms are subject to reasonable restrictions by the state in the interest of the sovereignty, security, and integrity of India, public order, morality, etc.
  • Article 20: This article protects the rights of persons accused of crimes. It prohibits retrospective laws, double jeopardy, and self-incrimination.
  • Article 21: This article protects the right to life and personal liberty of every person. It states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law. It also includes the right to dignity, privacy, health, education, etc.
  • Article 21A: This article provides the right to elementary education for all children of the age of six to fourteen years. It states that the state shall provide free and compulsory education to such children in a manner as the state may determine.
• Article 22: This article protects the rights of persons arrested and detained by the state. It states that no person shall be arrested or detained without being informed of the reasons for such arrest or detention. It also gives the right to a lawyer for arrested/detained persons. It also states that no person shall be detained for more than 24 hours without being produced before a magistrate. It also provides for preventive detention in certain cases, subject to the safeguards of the law.
  
  

  Law and Order | Constitution of India

  Right against Exploitation: This set, consisting of (Article 23 and Article 24,) This right is aimesd at preventing exploitation of vulnerable sections of society. It prohibits practices such as human trafficking and child labour.

  • • Article 23 prohibits the traffic in human beings and the beggar and other similar forms of forced labour. It also makes any violation of this provision a punishable offence under the law. This article forbids any form of exploitation that involves the sale and purchase of human beings, mostly for the purpose of sexual slavery, forced prostitution, or forced labour. It also forbids any form of exploitation that involves forcing a person to work for no or inadequate remuneration, such as bonded labour. It also forbids any form of exploitation that involves forcing a person to work against his or her will, even if remuneration is given. This article protects the citizens not only from the state, but also from private individuals or groups. The state is obliged to take punitive and preventive measures to abolish such exploitations altogether.
    • Article 24 prohibits the employment of children in factories, mines, or any other hazardous occupation. It states that no child below the age of fourteen years shall be employed to work in any factory or mine or engaged in any other hazardous employment. This article aims to protect the health and well-being of children, and to ensure their right to education and development. It also aims to prevent the exploitation of children by employers who may subject them to long hours of work, low wages, and harsh conditions. The state is obliged to enact laws and policies to regulate and prohibit the employment of children in harmful occupations, and to provide for their education and welfare.
• Right to Freedom of Religion: (Article 25 to Article 28) This right ensures religious freedom allowing individuals to practise, profess, and propagate any religion while also safeguarding the rights of religious minorities.
  • Article 25: This article gives the freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate any religion to all citizens. This means that every person has the right to choose and follow any religion of his or her choice, and to express and spread his or her religious beliefs. However, this right is subject to public order, morality, and health, and the State can make laws to regulate or restrict any religious activity that may harm the society or the country. 
  • Article 26: This article gives the right to manage religious affairs to every religious group or denomination. This means that every religious group has the right to establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes, to manage its own affairs in matters of religion, to own and acquire property, and to administer such property according to law. However, this right is also subject to public order, morality, and health, and the State can make laws to regulate or control any religious activity or property that may affect the society or the country.
  • Article 27: This article gives the freedom from taxes for the promotion of any particular religion to all citizens. This means that no person can be compelled to pay any tax that is used for the benefit or maintenance of any specific religion or religious group. This article ensures that the state does not favour or support any religion with public money and maintains a neutral and impartial attitude towards all religions.
  • Article 28: This article gives the freedom from religious instruction in state-funded educational institutions to all citizens. This means that no religious instruction can be provided in any educational institution that is maintained by the state or receives aid from the state. However, this article also allows religious instruction in educational institutions that are administered by the state but established under any endowment or trust that requires such instruction, provided that no person is forced to attend such instruction without his or her consent. This article also allows religious worship in educational institutions that are recognized by the state or receive aid from the state, provided that no person is forced to attend such worship without his or her consent.
• Cultural and Educational Rights: Article 29 and Article 30), This right ensures the  protection of  the rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions, as well as to preserve their unique culture.
  • Article 29 gives the right to any section of the citizens, having a distinct language, script or culture, to conserve the same. It also prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, language or any of them in admission to educational institutions maintained by the state or receiving aid from the state.
  • Article 30 gives the right to all religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. It also prohibits the state from discriminating against any minority institution in granting aid or recognition.
• Right to Constitutional Remedies: (Article 32) This right empowers individuals to directly approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights including the writs of i) habeas corpus, ii) mandamus, iii) prohibition, if) certiorari, and v) quo war-rento. It acts as a safeguard to ensure that these rights are not violated.

The Story of Article 31 and the concept of Eminent Domain

Article 31 and the concept of eminent domain is a tale of evolution of the constitution and its interpretation by the judiciary in India. Article 31 was one of the original Fundamental Rights in the Constitution of India, which guaranteed the Right to Property and provided for compensation in case of acquisition by the state. The concept of Eminent Domain under Article 300A is a legal doctrine that allows the state to take private property for public use, with terms and conditions applied.

Freedom of Speech

Article 31 was amended several times by the Parliament to curtail the scope of judicial review and to expand the power of the state to acquire property for various purposes. The amendments also introduced Articles 31A and Article 31B which provided for saving certain laws from being challenged on the ground of violating the Right to Property, and gave primacy to the directive principles of state policy over the fundamental rights in certain matters.

The Supreme Court, on the other hand, tried to uphold the sanctity of the Right to Property and interpreted Article 31 and its amendments in a way that balanced the interests of the individual and the society. The court also developed various principles and tests to determine what constitutes public purpose, proper compensation, and reasonable restrictions on the Right to Property.

The conflict between the Parliament and the judiciary over Article 31 reached its climax in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, where the court held that the Right to Property is not a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and can be amended by a constitutional amendment. However, the court also ruled that any amendment that affects the basic structure of the Constitution is invalid and subject to judicial review.

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 finally repealed Article 31 and deleted the Right to Property from the list of Fundamental Rights. Instead, it was inserted Article 300A in Part XII of the Constitution, which provides that no person shall be deprived of his property except by authority of law. Thus, the Right to Property was reduced to a constitutional right, which can be regulated or restricted by any law made by the Parliament or the state legislatures. That is, this right no longer is part of the basic structure of the constitution and through legislation, the parliament can override this right in cases of subjects of national interest.

The concept of Eminent Domain, however, still remains valid and applicable in India, the state has the authority to make laws in that matter. The state can still acquire private property for public use, but it has to follow the procedure established by law and pay adequate compensation to the owner. The courts can also review whether the acquisition is for a genuine public purpose and whether it violates any other constitutional provision or principle.

The story of Article 31 and the concept of Eminent Domain reflects how the Constitution of India has evolved over time and how it has been interpreted by different organs of the state. It also shows how the balance between individual rights and social welfare has been altered and maintained by various factors and forces in Indian polity.

Is Article 31 missing in the Part III: Fundamental Rights of the Indian Constitution?

Article 31 was one of the articles in Part III: Fundamental Rights of the Indian Constitution, which dealt with the Right to Property. However, with the introduction of the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act in 1978, this article was repealed and the Right to Property was shifted from Part III to Article 300A of Part XII of the Constitution. Part XII of the Constitution of India is a part that deals with the financial provisions of the country. It covers topics such as taxes, funds, property, contracts, suits, borrowing, trade, commerce, etc. It consists of four chapters and 37 articles, from Article 264 to Article 300A.

Freedom of practicing any religion

For the state, it gave more freedom and flexibility to enact laws and policies relating to property. It also enabled the state to pursue its goals of social justice and economic development more effectively and efficiently.  Social justice ensures that everyone has access to what is good for the person, both individually and in our associations with others. Social justice also imposes on each of us a personal responsibility to collaborate with others, at whatever level of the “Common Good” in which we participate, to design and continually perfect our institutions as tools for personal and social development. Economic development involves increasing the production and consumption of goods and services, creating more and better jobs, reducing poverty and inequality, enhancing human capital and skills, and ensuring environmental sustainability. Economic development also requires the creation and maintenance of economic institutions that support the efficient and equitable allocation of resources, the protection of property rights, the promotion of innovation and entrepreneurship, and the provision of public goods and services.

For the citizens, it reduced their protection and security over their property rights. It also limited their scope to fight against unjust action of the state regarding their property. The amendment also aimed to balance the interests of the individual and the society, and to uphold the principles of socialism and democracy. By making sure that the right to property was still granted to the citizen through constitutional rights, it empowered the government to limit this right for the economic and social development of the people. The Constitution of India no longer has Article 31, which used to protect the right to property as a fundamental right. However, the right to property still exists in the Constitution under Article 300A, which makes it a constitutional right.

Scope of Fundamental Rights

The scope of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution is quite extensive. They encompass a wide array of individual freedoms and rights, including the right to life, liberty, equality, and personal expression. 

Justice | Constitution of India

From time to time, the Supreme Court has interpreted various articles of  Part III of the Constitution to include more and more rights to the citizens. The widely interpreted such Article is Article 21, Right to life. Some of the landmark judgements that have expanded the scope of the Fundamental Rights are:

In A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) case, when A K Gopalan was detained by the state of Madras under the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, which allowed the government to detain anyone without trial for the sake of national security, he challenged his detention in the Supreme Court, claiming that it violated his fundamental rights under Articles 19, 21, and 22 of the Constitution of India. In this case, the Court grappled with the concept of Article 21, which pertains to the Right to Life. It was in this case that the Court affirmed that Article 21 did not necessarily need to follow the law made by the government. This laid the foundation for the broader interpretation of this fundamental right, emphasising its essential role in safeguarding individual liberties.

Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1952) marked another turning point. In this case, Shankari Prasad, a zamindar at the time, challenged the validity of the First Constitutional Amendment Act of 1951, which had inserted Articles 31A and 31B in the Constitution of India. These articles aimed to protect the land reform laws enacted by various states from being struck down by the courts on the ground of violation of the right to property, which was then a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(f). The Court ruled on the constitutional validity of the first Amendment of 1951, which curtailed the right to property. The Court’s decision upheld the idea that the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 included the power to amend Fundamental Rights. This meant that the Parliament could change the meaning and extent of these rights by making changes to the Constitution, a decision that had a big impact on the future of these rights.

However, Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967) presented a different perspective. Golak Nath and his family, who claimed ownership of a significant amount of land in Punjab, challenged a state enactment that restricted land ownership. The Court ruled in favour of Golak Nath, asserting that Parliament could not take away Fundamental Rights. This case emphasised the limitations on the government’s authority to restrict fundamental rights.

The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case refined the understanding of Fundamental Rights. In this landmark judgement, the Court introduced the concept of the “basic structure of the Constitution”, declaring that Parliament could not amend or alter it. This means that this decision protected the basic ideas of the Constitution from being changed in a way that could harm its fundamental values.

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) revolved around election disputes and the 39th Amendment of the Constitution. The amendment said that the courts of India could not question or challenge the election of the President, the Vice President, the Prime Minister and the Speaker of the Lok Sabha. The amendment was made because Indira Gandhi’s election to the Parliament was declared invalid by the Allahabad High Court. The court said that she had used unfair methods to win the election. Indira Gandhi appealed to the Supreme Court. But before the Supreme Court could decide, the 39th amendment was passed. 

In this case, the Court identified new features as “Basic Features,” which included the rule of law, democracy, and judicial review. This recognition further fortified the protection of these essential features against unwarranted alterations.

The case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) tackled the issue of arbitrary government actions. Maneka Gandhi, a politician and an activist in India, was asked to surrender her passport at the regional passport office. When asked for a reason, the Ministry of External Affairs refused and stated that it is in the name of “public interest.” Mrs. Gandhi filed a writ petition challenging that it violated her fundamental rights to equality, right to freedom and right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court, in its decision, stressed that the procedures under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution must be fair and reasonable, and not based on the whims and fancies of the government. This reinforces the principle that fundamental rights are not subject to the arbitrary actions of the government, which means that the government cannot violate or restrict the fundamental rights of the people without a valid reason and a proper legal process. The Supreme Court extended the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 to include, “right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it”

In Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, 1996, interpreting the Article 21 itself, Supreme Court differentiated between euthanasia and suicide. The court held that euthanasia, which involves the termination of life when death is certain and imminent due to a terminal illness or vegetative state, may be considered an extension of the fundamental right to life with dignity up to the natural end of life. However, this right does not encompass the right to end life unnaturally or prematurely. 

Through various cases as such, Fundamental Rights in India has gone through stages of evolution to include multiple components of freedom to citizens, like, right against sexual harassment at workplace, right to livelihood, right to health and medical care, right to privacy, prisoners’ rights, right against illegal detention etc.

Significance of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution are the bedrock of individual liberties and fairness in governance. They act as a shield, guarding citizens against any overreach or unjust actions by the government. These rights are important in upholding the dignity and respect of individuals. They ensure that every Indian, regardless of their station in life, enjoys certain basic freedoms. If the Fundamental Rights are breached, individuals can seek resort through the legal system. These rights represent the principles of justice and equality, playing an instrumental role in shaping India as an equitable and just nation, 

Enforcement and violation of Fundamental Rights 

Enforcement of Fundamental rights is crucial in order to  ensure their effective realisation and to uphold the principles of justice and equality in the society. Like many other countries ,in India too Fundamental Rights are enforced through legislative and judiciary approaches (judicial review). While enacting any laws, the parliament needs to make sure that they comply with the Fundamental Rights of the citizens. Since these rights are fundamental to all human beings irrespective of whether Parliament has the right to restrict Fundamental Rights for a certain period of time. It is during an emergency and cannot exceed more than 6 months. However, if it is exceeding 6 months or if the parliament enact laws that violate the fundamental rights of the citizens, the Supreme Court through Judicial review can declare the parts of the act that are inconsistent to the Constitution. 

Apart from this, Article 32 in Part III of the Constitution provides for constitutional remedies in case of violation of any fundamental rights. It empowers both the judicial body and the citizens to protect the Fundamental Rights. While it gives the citizens the right to approach the Supreme Court or High Court directly in case of the said violations, it gives power to the judicial body to issue writs to enforce Fundamental Rights.