Fundamental Rights (Articles 12–35)

Part III (Articles 12–35) contains Fundamental Rights — justiciable rights enforceable by courts against the State. Dr. Ambedkar called Article 32 the "heart and soul" of the Constitution. These rights are available against the State as defined in Article 12. Two exceptions apply against private individuals also: Article 17 (untouchability) and Article 23 (forced labour/trafficking).

For Part III purposes, 'State' includes: Government and Parliament of India; Government and Legislature of each State; all local or other authorities within India; all local or other authorities under the control of Government of India.

Key expansion through cases:

• R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority (1979): Body that is an instrumentality or agency of Government is 'State' under Article 12.

• Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. IICB (2002): 7-judge bench — 'functional test': pervasive governmental control + financial dependence + public importance of functions.

• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib (1981): Societies substantially financed and controlled by Government are 'State'.

Article 13(1): Pre-constitutional laws inconsistent with FRs are void to the extent of inconsistency — Doctrine of Eclipse applies (law is dormant, revives if FR amended to remove inconsistency — Bhikhaji Narain Dhakras v. State of MP, 1955).

Article 13(2): State shall NOT make any law abridging FRs — void ab initio. Doctrine of Severability applies — only offending provision severed, rest valid if separable (R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India, 1957).

Article 13(3): 'Law' includes ordinances, regulations, bye-laws, rules, notifications, customs, usages. Constitutional amendments are NOT 'law' under Article 13 — subject to Basic Structure doctrine.

Doctrine of Eclipse: Pre-constitutional law inconsistent with FR becomes dormant (eclipsed) but not dead. If the FR is subsequently amended to remove the inconsistency, the law automatically revives. Does NOT apply to post-constitutional laws — those are void ab initio.

Doctrine of Severability: Only the unconstitutional part of a law is struck down; the rest remains valid if the valid and invalid portions are separable. Test: Would Parliament have enacted the law even without the invalid portion?

Doctrine of Waiver: Fundamental Rights cannot be waived — they are given as a matter of public policy and cannot be contracted away (Behram Khurshid Pesikaka v. State of Bombay, 1955).

Article 14 — Equality Before Law and Equal Protection of Laws

Two distinct guarantees: (1) Equality before law — negative concept, no special privileges (from English Rule of Law — Dicey); (2) Equal protection of laws — positive concept, equals to be treated equally (from US 14th Amendment).

Twin tests of reasonable classification:

• The classification must be based on intelligible differentia (clear and understandable basis)

• The differentia must have rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved

Evolution of Article 14 through case law:

• State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952): Twin tests laid down

• E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974): Arbitrariness violates Article 14 — equality is antithetic to arbitrariness

• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Article 14 read with Articles 19 and 21 — 'golden triangle'

• Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017): Triple talaq struck down as manifestly arbitrary under Article 14

Article 15 — Prohibition of Discrimination

Article 15(1): State shall not discriminate on grounds ONLY of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Language and domicile are NOT included.

Article 15(2): No citizen shall face disabilities in access to public places on these grounds alone.

Article 15(3): State may make special provisions for women and children — exception to 15(1).

Article 15(4): State may make special provisions for socially/educationally backward classes or SC/ST — inserted by 1st Amendment (1951) after Champakam Dorairajan case.

Article 15(5): Reservation for backward classes/SC/ST in private educational institutions — 93rd Amendment (2005), upheld in Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008).

Article 15(6): 10% EWS reservation — 103rd Amendment (2019), upheld in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022) by 3:2 majority.

Article 16 — Equality of Opportunity in Public Employment

Article 16(4): Reservations for backward classes not adequately represented in State services. 50% ceiling laid down in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) — the Mandal Case. Creamy layer to be excluded.

Article 16(4-A): Reservation in promotion for SC/ST — 77th Amendment (1995).

Article 16(4-B): Unfilled SC/ST vacancies carried forward — not subject to 50% cap — 81st Amendment (2000).

Article 16(6): 10% EWS reservation in public employment — 103rd Amendment (2019).

Article 17 — Abolition of Untouchability Practice forbidden in any form; offence punishable by law. Applies against private individuals too. Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 enforces this.

Article 18 — Abolition of Titles No title (except military/academic) shall be conferred by the State. Bharat Ratna and Padma awards are NOT 'titles' under Article 18 — Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996).

SIX freedoms guaranteed to CITIZENS only:

• (a) Speech and expression: Includes freedom of press, right to know, commercial speech, right to silence. Restrictions (Art. 19(2)): sovereignty, integrity, security, friendly relations, public order, decency, morality, contempt, defamation, incitement.

• (b) Peaceful assembly without arms: Restrictions (Art. 19(3)): sovereignty, integrity, public order.

• (c) Form associations/unions: Includes trade unions, political parties. Restrictions (Art. 19(4)): sovereignty, integrity, public order, morality.

• (d) Move freely throughout India: Restrictions (Art. 19(5)): general public interest, protection of Scheduled Tribes.

• (e) Reside and settle anywhere: Restrictions (Art. 19(5)): same as above.

• (g) Practise any profession/occupation/trade/business: Restrictions (Art. 19(6)): professional qualifications, State monopoly.

Note: Article 19(1)(f) (right to property) was deleted by 44th Amendment, 1978. Now only 6 freedoms.

All restrictions must be: (i) imposed by law, (ii) reasonable, (iii) in relation to specified grounds only.

Article 20 — Triple Protection (non-suspendable even during Emergency):

1. No ex post facto criminal law

2. No double jeopardy (Nemo bis punitur pro eodem delicto)

3. No compelled self-incrimination

Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010): Narco-analysis, brain mapping, polygraph without consent violate Article 20(3).

Article 21 — Right to Life and Personal Liberty (most expansive FR):

Narrow start: A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) — any procedure prescribed by law suffices. Landmark expansion: Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) — procedure must be just, fair, and reasonable. Substantive due process imported.

Post-Maneka judicially expanded rights under Article 21:

• Right to livelihood (Olga Tellis v. BMC, 1985)

• Right to speedy trial (Hussainara Khatoon, 1979)

• Right to legal aid (M.H. Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra, 1978)

• Right to education — now Article 21-A (Unnikrishnan JP v. State of AP, 1993)

• Right to clean environment (M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1987)

• Right to privacy (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017 — 9-judge bench)

• Right to die with dignity — passive euthanasia (Common Cause v. Union of India, 2018)

• Right to health and medical care (Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity, 1996)

• Right to shelter (Chameli Singh v. State of UP, 1996)

Article 21-A — Right to Education: Inserted by 86th Amendment (2002). Free and compulsory education for children aged 6–14. Implemented by Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

Article 22 — Protection Against Arrest: Two parts: (1) Rights of arrested person — inform grounds, right to legal counsel, produce before magistrate within 24 hours; (2) Preventive detention — Advisory Board required for detention beyond 3 months.

Article 23: Prohibits trafficking, begar, and forced labour. Applies against State AND private individuals. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984): SC ordered identification, release, and rehabilitation of bonded labourers.

Article 24: No child below 14 years in factories, mines, or other hazardous employment. Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2016 expanded the prohibition.

Article 25: Right to freely profess, practise, and propagate religion — subject to public order, morality, health. State can regulate secular activities associated with religion.

Article 26: Religious denomination's right to establish institutions, manage religious affairs, own property.

Article 27: No compulsion to pay taxes for promotion of any particular religion. Distinction between 'tax' (compulsory — Art. 27 applies) and 'fee' (for services — Art. 27 does not apply).

Article 28: No religious instruction in institutions wholly maintained out of State funds.

Article 29: Right of any section of citizens with distinct language/script/culture to conserve the same. No denial of admission to State-maintained/aided institutions on grounds of religion, race, caste, or language.

Article 30: All religious and linguistic minorities have right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. State can regulate to ensure academic standards. T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) — 11-judge bench laid down the law.

'Heart and soul' of the Constitution (Dr. Ambedkar). Five writs: habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, quo warranto. Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right — cannot be suspended except under Article 359 during National Emergency (and even then Arts. 20 and 21 remain enforceable).