& testbook.com The Doctrine of Eclipse Under Article 13 : Polity Notes for UPSC 2022/03/10 The Doctrine of Eclipse is a principle that upholds the concept of fundamental rights being prospective. The Doctrine of Eelipse deals with article 13 of the Constitution of India. In ease any law made by the Legislature is inconsistent with Part II of the Constitution, then such law is deemed invalid and inoperative. Itis because itis overshadowed by Fundamental Rights and is said to cast the Eclipse on it. Only when the corresponding fundamental right is amended, the inconsistency of the eclipsed law can be removed. When the eclipse gets removed the law becomes automatically valid and operative. In simpler words, a law that violates fundamental rights remains in an eclipsed condition which makes it inoperative and unenforceable. Study this topie of Indian Polity from the perspective of UPSC Exams. Also, Read about the Doctrine of Pith and Substance here. Salient Features of the Doctrine of Eclipse ‘The significant features and characteristics of the Doctrine are as follows: Applicability to Pre Constitutional Laws ~ The Doctrine is applicable to laws that have become operational with the adoption of the Indian Constitution on 26th January 1950. Non Applicability to Post Constitutional Laws ~The Doctrine is not applicable to post-constitutional laws because they are invalid at their inception and thus, cannot be validated by any subsequent amendment. Conflict with the fundamental rights ~ If law violates a fundamental right, only then it can be overshadowed and be termed inoperative. Inoperative- The Doctrine does not nullify a law but only makes it defective and unenforceable. Fundamental Right and Amendment ~ An amendment to the concerning Fundamental right makes the law operative automatically. Study the NCERT Notes on Types of Writs in India here. Evolution of the Doctrine of Eclipse Keshavan Case The case of Keshavan raised several challenging issues related to the Doctrine such as the retrospective and prospective nature of Article 13(1) along with the meaning of the word ‘void’ in Article 13(1).The case dealt with regard to a petitioner being prosecuted for publishing a pamphlet without permission under the Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act of 1931. The case was pending when the Constitution of India commenced. The Court held the relevant regulations violated Article 19(1)(a) and are ‘void’ to the extent of their inconsistency with the fundamental right. The Court further stated that fundamental rights are apparently prospeetive in nature and that the word ‘void’ did not mean repealing the statute or provision, Also, study the Emergency Provisions of the Indian Constitution here. EN. Balsara & Behram case Behram Khurshid Pesikaka v. The State of Bombay explained the reasonable link between Article 13(1) and the pre-constitutional laws. In this ise, the person was accused under Section 66(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act of 1949. Section 66(b) was held inoperative and unenforceable by the court because it was violative of Article 19(1) @. The Court said that a part of the law would be deemed as unconstitutional and not the whole law. Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of Madhya Pradesh. The concept, prineiple and applicability of Doctrine of Eclipse took shape in the case of Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of Madhya Pradesh. ‘The case challenged the C. P. and Berar Motor Vehicles Amendment Act of 1947 which authorized the State Government to regulate and take up all of the motor transport businesses. The act was a pre-constitutional law and was deemed to be a violation of Article 19(4)(g) of Part IIL. The provisions of this Legislative Act were made inoperative by the Doctrine of Eclipse In the year 1951, Article 19(1)(g) was amended which made the eclipsed law enforceable against citizens as well as non-citizens. The Supreme Court suggested that the amendment was made to remove the shadow. Study the NCERT Notes on Schedules of the Indian Constitution here. Doctrine of Eclipse and Article 368 The Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act of 1953 was challenged in I. C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab, on the grounds of violating the fundamental right to hold and acquire property and practice any profession. The Golaknath case debated on the validity and absoluteness of Article 368. ‘The Parliament Legislature was given restrictive amending powers under Article 368 with no power to amend the fundamental rights. Thus, Article 368 was eclipsed. In the legendary case of Kesavananda Bharati v. Union of India the judgement was overruled and it provided the Parliament powers to amend the fundamental rights of the Indian Constitution whieh removed the Eclipse from Article 368.Also, read about the Doctrine of Proportionality UPSC notes here. Doctrine of Eclipse and Section 309 The Doctrine extended its provisions under the Indian Penal Code in the cases of Rathinam and Gian Kaur. Section 309 of IPC which criminalizes attempts to suicide was challenged in the case of Rathinam v. Union of India, Section 309 was deemed to be unconstitutional as the Court observed that Article 21 holds the right to live, so it also induces the right not to live A constitutional bench reversed the Judgment of Rathinam case and upheld the validity of Seetion 309 in the case of Gian Kaur v. the State of Punjab. Thus, removing the Eclipse on Section 309 to make it operational again. ‘Testbook is a one stop solution for all your exam preparations. Be it preparing for UPSC, $SC, Banking, Railways or any other competitive exams. You can have access to study material for different subjects and even check your progress through our daily quizzes, mock tests, question banks, ete. Stay updated with current affairs and classroom sessions. Download the Testbook App now! repre or rgia eta hag Also check the related articles for UPSC Preparation in the table below: Privilege Motion Prime minister and council of ministers ‘National Human Rights Commission Judicial review Emergency Provisions of the Indian Constitution National Investigation Agency Frequently Asked Questions: Doctrine of Eclipse Qu Which article deals with the Doctrine of Eclipse? Ans.1 Article 13 of the Indian Constitution deals with it. Q.2 What is the Doctrine of Severability? Ans.2 IL is also known as the doctrine of separability. Doctrine of severability is related to the doctrine of eclipse. Under the doctrine of eclipse, when any law is deemed invalid then according to the doctrine of severability, if a part of the act/law does not violate fundamental rights then it can be considered valid and even imposed. In simple words, doctrine of severability allows the part of a law to be stated as valid instead of considering the whole law as invalid. Q.3 What is the Doetrine of Eclipse?Ans.3 Doctrine of eclipse can be considered as a guarantee of fundamental rights. Doctrine of eclipse says that any law which violates fundamental rights is invalid. This law can only be valid if any amendment is made to the fundamental rights to remove the overshadowing of the law Q.4 Why was the Right to Property removed from Fun ights? Ans.4 The Zamindari system was abolished by the government under direetive principles of state policy but it violated fundamental right to property. By the 44th constitutional amendment Act 1978, the right to property was removed from fundamental rights and moved to part XIII, article 300A as a legal right. This was done to limit the right to property and promote publie welfare. Q.5 What is the difference between O1 ary Legal Rights and Fundamental Rights? Ans.5 Ordinary legal rights are protected and enforced by ordinary laws whereas, Fundamental Rights are protected and guaranteed by the constitution of the country. Ordinary rights may be changed by the legislature by the process of law-making, but a fundamental right may only be changed by amending the Constitution itself. erry] Our Super Teachers have gE Pe Ue LT reer UPSC Toppers gram —_ atic lee aca a cE sdmany more Diestbook The Complete Exam Preparation baru) = PSs