CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW-I

Dr. Basanagouda. B. Ballari

Advocate,
High Court of Karnataka
Bangalore/Guest Faculty RGCL
Cell No: 9448209941
 MEANING OF CONSTITUTION
➢ the Constitution means a set of fundamental principles, basic
rules and established precedents.
➢ A constitution is a written document that contains a set of rules
for a government

The document lays down the framework demarcating

fundamental political code, structure, procedures, powers, and
duties of government institutions and sets out fundamental
rights, directive principles, and the duties of citizens.

The Constitution of India: (Bharatiya Saṃvidhana) is the

supreme law of India.

It was adopted by the Constituent Assembly of India on 26

November, 1949 and became effective on 26 January 1950.
 KINDS OF CONSTITUTION

➢Federal and Unitary form of Constitutions.

➢Codified and Uncodified.
➢Flexible and Inflexible Constitutions.
➢Presidential and Parliamentary Constitutions.
 Features of Indian Constitution
1. Lengthiest and the longest constitution in the
world.
2. Rigid and Flexible.
3. Parliamentary Form of Government.
4. Independent and Integrated Judicial System.
5. Fundamental Rights
6. Directive Principles.
7. Adult suffrage.
8. Single citizenship
9. Secular state
10.Fundamental duties
 ….
1. Lengthiest and the longest constitution in the world
➢ Articles/448: American: 07 originally
➢ 25 parts Amendments: 27
➢ 12 Schedules

2. Rigid and Flexible.

The Indian Constitution is neither rigid nor flexible, this is also one
of the reasons for its length. The famous example of the rigid
constitution is the Constitution of the U.S., and it is known as a rigid
constitution as the amendment process is very difficult. The Indian
Constitution is not very difficult to amend, as the Constitution of
the U.S.A. It has gone through 104 amendments so far but there
are certain steps to be satisfied before bringing in the amendment.
Thus the Indian Constitution is a unique blend of rigidity and
flexibility.
 ….
03. Parliamentary Form of Government.
The Bicameral Legislature system is followed in our Country. The
Parliamentary system is preferred over the Presidential system as it
ensures the equal distribution of power and also power is not
within the hands of a single person.
04. Independent Judiciary
The Constitution makers ensured that Judiciary has to be
independent so that it will not be biased. The Supreme court is
considered as the watchdog of democracy. There are various
provisions in the Article which ensures the independence of the
judiciary,
➢ The appointment of Judges is independent and there is no
involvement of any executive authorities.

➢ The tenure of Judges is secured.

➢ The removal of judges from the tenure must be also based on the
constitutional provisions.
 ….
05. Fundamental Rights
Part III of the Indian Constitution deals with fundamental
rights.
➢ Article 12 to Article 35 of the Indian constitution provides
for FR

06. Directive Principles of State Policy

Part IV of the Indian Constitution deals with the Directive
Principles of State Policy. It is the duty of every State to
apply these principles while making any new legislation.
 …..
07. Adult suffrage
The concept of Adult suffrage allows every citizen of
our country who is above eighteen years has the right
to vote in the elections. Any adult who is eligible to
vote should not be discriminated on any basis like
gender, caste and religion. This provision was added in
the sixty-first amendment which is also known as the
Constitution Act, 1988. The accepted age for voting
was twenty-one before this amendment afterwards it
was changed to 18 years of age. Article 326 of the
Indian Constitution guarantees this right.
 …..
08. Single Citizenship
There is no separate citizenship for the States and the
Centre like in various federal countries like the U.S.A. There
is single citizenship provided to our citizens. Part 2 of the
Indian Constitution, i.e. Article 5 to Article 11 of the Indian
Constitution deals with citizenship.
09. Secular State
The term Secular State means that there is no separate
religion for the State and every religion is respected equally
in the State. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution itself
states that India has to be a secular state.
10. Fundamental Duties
Article 51A of the Indian Constitution provides various
fundamental duties.
 Preamble
Preamble
WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved
to constitute India into a SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST,
SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC and REPUBLIC and to secure
to all its citizens:

JUSTICE, social, economic and political;

LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and
worship;
EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote
among them all
FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and
the unity and integrity of the Nation;
 ….
THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION IS
TO PROMOTE HARMONY THROUGHOUT THE NATION.

• Social Justice – Social justice means that the Constitution

wants to create a society without discrimination on any
grounds like caste, creed, gender, religion, etc.

• Economic Justice – Economic Justice means no

discrimination can be caused by people on the basis of
their wealth, income, and economic status. Every person
must be paid equally for an equal position and all people
must get opportunities to earn for their living.
• Political Justice – Political Justice means all the people
have an equal, free and fair right without any
discrimination to participate in political opportunities.
 STATUS OF PREAMBLE

The preamble being part of the Constitution is

discussed several times in the Supreme Court.
1. Berubari V. Union of India: It was used as a reference
under Article 143(1) of the Constitution which was on
the implementation of the Indo-Pakistan Agreement
related to the Berubari Union and in exchanging the
enclaves which were decided for consideration.

Through the Berubari case, the Court stated that

‘Preamble is the key to open the mind of the
makers’ but it can not be considered as part of the
Constitution. Therefore it is not enforceable in a court
of law.
 …..
2. Kesavananda Bharati V. State of Kerala: In this case,
for the first time, a bench of 13 judges was assembled
to hear a writ petition. The Court held that:
– The Preamble of the Constitution will now be
considered as part of the Constitution.
– The Preamble is not the supreme power or source of any
restriction or prohibition but it plays an important role in
the interpretation of statutes and provisions of the
Constitution.
– So, it can be concluded that preamble is part of the
introductory part of the Constitution.

3. In the 1995 case of Union Government Vs LIC of

India also, the Supreme Court has once again held
that Preamble is the integral part of the Constitution
but is not directly enforceable in a court of justice in
India.
 CITIZENSHIP (Article 5-11)
MEANING: The population of India is divided in to two
1. Citizens of India
2. Aliens

The citizens of India is a person who enjoys full civil and political rights.
➢ All fundamental rights are available to citizens of India
➢ Citizens of India are entitled to hold office under the constitution such
as:
• President of India
• Vice-President of India
• Judges of the Supreme court
• Judges of the High Courts
• Attorney General of India
• Governor of the State
• Advocate General
WHO ARE THE CITIZEN OF INDIA ?
 ……
1. Citizenship by domicile- Article 5
2. Citizenship of emigrants to India from Pakistan – Article 6.
3. Citizenship of migrants to Pakistan- Article 7
4. Citizenship of Indians abroad- Article 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Article 9 of the Indian Constitution states that “Persons
voluntarily acquiring citizenship of a foreign State not to
be citizens”.
2. A.10 -CONTINUANCE OF RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP
3. Article.11- Parliament to regulate the right of citizenship
by law
Article 5: Citizenship During the Commencement of
the Constitution

During the commencement of the Indian Constitution, each

person who has his or her domicile in the territory of
India and :

(a) who was born in the Indian territory; or

(b) either of whose parents was born in the Indian territory;

(c) An individual who has been ordinarily resident in the

Indian territory for at least 5 years immediately preceding
such commencement, shall be a citizen of India.
 …..
Mohammad Raja V. State of Bombay
AIR 1956 SC 1436.
➢ Mohammed Raja an Iranian by birth came to India in 1938
➢ He went to pilgrims to Iraq in 1945
➢ in 1957 and requested to stay in India
➢ His request was rejected and ordered to leave India
➢ He filed a suit in City Civil Court Bombay to declare that he is a
citizen of India
➢ City Civil Court Bombay Dismissed the Suit
➢ CHALLENGED THE ORDER IN SC
➢ His contention was he must be regarded as citizen of India under
Article 5 of the Indian Constitution
➢ SC- HELD he did not have a domicile and hence he is not a citizen
of India.
 Article 6: Rights of Citizenship of Certain Persons who have
Migrated to India Territory from Territory of Pakistan
A person who has migrated to the territory of India from
the territory currently enclosed in Pakistan shall be
deemed to be an Indian citizen at the commencement of
this Constitution if –

• If a person migrated from Pakistan to India before 19 July

1948 shall be considered as an Indian citizen if either of
the person’s parents or any of his grandparents were born
in India as expressed in the Government of India act, 1935
and has been living or residing since the date of migration.
• For people who migrated after 19 July 1948, they should
be registered as a citizen of India by an officer from the
Government of India but for registration, the subjected
person has to be a resident in the territory of India for a
minimum of six months, preceding the date of his
application.
 ….
In the case of Kulathil Mammu v. State of
Kerela. AIR 1966 SC 1614

“The term “migrated” in this Article was

defined. It was held that the term migrated
means voluntary and permanently leaving in
India from Pakistan.
 Article 7. citizenship of certain
migrants to Pakistan
If a person has migrated to the territories of
Pakistan after the first day of March 1947,
shall not be considered as a citizen of India.
Exception
A person who has migrated to the Pakistan
territory and then returns back with the
permission from the requisite authority.
 …..
State of Bihar v Kumar Amar Singh, AIR 1955 SC 282
➢ the wife left her husband in July, 1948 and went to Karachi.
➢ According to her statement, she went to Karachi
temporarily for treatment.
➢ Then she returned back to India in Dec, 1948 and was
permitted to stay on temporary permit.
➢ Then after the expiry of the period, she returned back to
Pakistan April, 1949
➢ 14th May, 1950, Kumar Rani again came back to India
under a permanent permit obtained from the High
Commissioner for India in Pakistan.
➢ This permit was, however, cancelled on the 12th July,
1950, by the Deputy High Commissioner, on the ground
that this was wrongly issued, without the concurrence of
the Government.
 ….
➢the Sub-Inspector of Police, Gaya, issued
notice to Kumar Rani directing her that since
her permanent permit had been cancelled,
she should leave lndia by the 31st July, 1950.
➢she wanted to get the permanent citizenship
of India, when her property in India was to be
taken under custody by Govt.
➢SC- she won’t be given permanent
citizenship.
Article 8. Citizenship of Indians abroad
If a person is residing in a different country
but either of the parents or grandparents
have taken birth in the Indian territory and if
the person is registered as a citizen of India
by the diplomatic or consular representative
of India, shall be considered as a citizen of
India.
 Article 9

If a person has voluntarily adopted the

citizenship of any Foreign State, then won’t be
considered as a citizen of India.

In the case of State of U.P. v. Rehmatullah AIR

1971 SC 1382, it was held that the Central
Government is authorised to take action against
people who have acquired the foreign citizenship
and have lost the citizenship of India, but they are
still residing in the country.
 A.10 -CONTINUANCE OF RIGHT OF CITIZENSHIP

Every person who is or is deemed to be a

citizen of India under any of the foregoing
provisions of this part shall, subject to the
provisions of any law that may be made by
the parliament, continue to be such citizen.
 Article.11- Parliament to regulate the right of
citizenship by law
Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Part
shall derogate from the power of Parliament
to make any provision with respect to the
acquisition and termination of citizenship and
all other matters relating to citizenship
CITIZENSHIP ACT OF 1955
 ….
➢ The Citizenship Act 1955 lays down rules for the acquisition and
determination of Indian citizenship.
➢ enables people who were once citizens of India but are now citizens
of another country, among others, to apply for an Overseas Citizen
of India.

ACQUISITION AND TERMINATION OF CITIZENSHIP AFTER THE

COMMENCEMENT OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION:
• by birth in India,
• by descent,
• through registration,
• by naturalisation
The Citizenship Act, 1955 has been amended — 1986, 1992,
2003, 2005, 2015 and 2019
 …..
THE 2019 AMENDMENT
The latest amendment ------ →Hindus, Sikhs,
Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from
Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan who
escaped religious persecution and arrived in
India before December 31, 2014, will be
eligible for Indian citizenship
 1. CITIZENSHIP BY BIRTH
(1) Except as provided in sub-section
(2) every person born in India,-
(a) on or after the 26th day of January,1950, but before the 1st
day of July, 1987;
(b) on or after the 1st day of July, 1987, but before the
commencement of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2003 and
either of whose parents is a citizen of India at the time of his
birth;
(c) on or after the commencement of the Citizenship
(Amendment) Act, 2003, where-
(i) both of his parents are citizens of India; or
(ii) one of whose parents is a citizen of India and the other is not
an illegal migrant at the time of his birth, shall be a citizen of India
by birth.
 2. CITIZENSHIP BY DESCENT

(1) A person born outside India shall be a citizen of India by

descent,-
(a) on or after the 26th day of January, 1950, but before
the 10th day of December, 1992, if his father is a citizen
of India at the time of his birth; or
(b) on or after the 10th day of December,1992, if either of
his parents is a citizen of India at the time of his birth:
➢ his birth is registered at an Indian consulate within one
year of its occurrence
 3. CITIZENSHIP BY REGISTRATION
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section and such other
conditions and restrictions as may be prescribed, the Central
Government may, on an application made in this behalf, register
as a citizen of India any person not being an illegal migrant who is
not already such citizen by virtue of the Constitution or of any
other provision of this Act if he belongs to any of the following
categories, namely:
(a) a person of Indian origin who are ordinarily resident in India
for seven years before making an application for registration;
(b) a person of Indian origin who is ordinarily resident in any
country or place outside undivided India;
(c) a person who is married to a citizen of India and is ordinarily
resident in India for seven years before making an application for
registration.
.
 …..
(d) minor children of persons who are citizens of India;
(e) a person of full age and capacity whose parents are registered
as citizens of India under clause (a) of this sub-section or sub-
section (1) of section 6;
(f) a person of full age and capacity who, or either of his parents,
was earlier citizen of independent India, and has been residing in
India for one year immediately before making an application for
registration;
(g) a person of full age and capacity who has been registered as an
overseas citizen of India for five years, and who has been residing
in India for one year before making an application for registration
 4. CITIZENSHIP BY NATURALIZATION

(1) Where an application is made in the prescribed

manner by any person of full age and capacity not being
an illegal migrant for the grant of a certificate of
naturalization to him, the Central Government may, if
satisfied that the applicant is QUALIFIED FOR
NATURALIZATION under the provisions of the Third
Schedule, grant to him a certificate of naturalization:
Provided that, if in the opinion of the Central Government,
the applicant is a person who has rendered distinguished
service to the cause of science, philosophy, art, literature,
world peace or human progress generally, it may waive all
or any of the conditions specified in the Third Schedule
 PART-III
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
Article 12-35

1. Right to equality
2. Right to freedom
3. Right against exploitation
4. Right to freedom of religion
5. Cultural and educational rights
6. Saving certain laws
7. Right to constitutional remedies
 ARTICLE 12- “STATE”

12. Definition
In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, the
State includes the Government and Parliament of India
and the Government and the Legislature of each of the
States and all local or other authorities within the
territory of India or under the control of the Government
of India

1. Government and parliament of India

2. Government and legislature of each states
3. all local or other authorities within the territory of India
or
4. under the control of the Government of India
 …..
OTHER AUTHORITIES:

1. Electricity Board of Rajastan V. Mohan Lal

AIR 1967 SC 1857-
> Electricity Board – State

2. Sukhdev Singh V. Bhagat Ram

AIR 1975 SC 1331-
> ONGC and LIC – State
 …..
3. Raman Dayaram Shetty Vs. The Intrenational
Airport Authority of India
AIR 1979 SC 1628-
> If body or agency or instrumentality of
Government- State.

4. U P Warehousing Corporation V Vijai Naraion

(1980)3 SCC 459
Warehousing Corporation- State
 ARTICLE-13
Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights

(1) All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the
commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are
inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of
such inconsistency, be void.

(2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges
the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in
contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the
contravention, be void
(3) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires law includes
any Ordinance, order, bye law, rule, regulation, notification,
custom or usages having in the territory of India the force of law;

(4)Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this

Constitution made under Article 368
 …..
Doctrine of severability: when some of the provisions of a statute becomes
unconstitutional on account of inconsistency with fundamental rights,
only to the repugnant provision of the law in question shall be treated by
the courts as void, and not the whole statute.
A.K.Gopalan. V. State of Madras
AIR 1950 SC 27

Doctrine of eclipse:
Any laws inconsistence with FR is not invalid or not dead totally but
overshadowed by fundamental rights
Till the time a law violates a fundamental right it is dormant and
inoperative.
The inconsistency can be removed by amendment to the fundamental
rights and becomes valid law
 ATRICLE. 14
14. Equality
Article 14 of the constitution 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 article constitutes of 2 parts:
1. Equality before law and
2. Equal protection of the laws.
 ….
1. Equality before the law talks about equal subjection of all citizens (rich or
poor, high or low, official or non-official) to the ordinary law of the land
administered by the ordinary law courts and is a negative concept as
implies the absence of any privilege in favor of any individual and equal
subjection of all classes to the ordinary law.
2. Equal protection of the laws is a Positive Concept as it implies equality
of treatment in equal circumstances both in privileges conferred and
liabilities imposed. So, all the persons must be treated alike on reasonable
classification. Among equals law should be equal and equally
administered.
EXCEPTION-REASONABLE CLASSIFICATION
Article 14 forbids class legislation but permits reasonable classification.
The two tests of classification are as follows:
1. The classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia
2. That differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be
achieved
 ….
1. A.K.Abbas Vs. Union of India (AIR 1980 SC
1975)
The validity of Cinematography Act, 1952 was
challenged on the grounded that the
classification of issue of A and U certificate by
the censor Board under the Act is
unreasonable classification.
SC- held that the classification of films into
two categories is reasonable classification
 ….
2. Air India v. Nargesh Meerza, (AIR 1981 SC 1829)

➢ The regulation of the Indian Airlines provided that an Air Hostess

had to retire from their services on attaining the age of 35 or if
they married within 4 years of their service or on their first
pregnancy whichever occurred earlier.

➢ The court held that terminating the services of an air hostess on

the grounds of pregnancy amounted to discrimination as it was an
unreasonable ground for termination. The regulations provided
that after 4 years of service the air hostess could marry therefore
the grounds of pregnancy was not reasonable.
Thus, it was held that this regulation violated Article 14 and such
termination would not be valid.
 ARTICLE.15 : PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION ON GROUNDS
OF RELIGION, RACE, CASTE, SEX OR PLACE OF BIRTH

(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on

grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or
any of them

(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste,

sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any
disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and palaces of
public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, baths, roads and places of public
resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or
dedicated to the use of the general public
 ….
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State
from making any special provision for women
and children

(4) Nothing in this article or in clause ( 2 ) of Article

29 shall prevent the State from making any
special provision for the advancement of any
socially and educationally backward classes of
citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Constitutional 1st Amendment
Act, 1951)
 …..
5. Empowers the country to make reservations with regard to
admissions into educational institutions both privately run and
those that are aided or not aided by the government. From this
rule only the minority run institutions are exempted.
(Constitutional 93rd Amendment Act, 2005)

6. Article 15 (6) is added to provide reservations to economically

weaker sections for admission to educational institutions
including private educational institutions, whether aided or
unaided by the State, other than the minority educational
institutions referred to in clause (1) of Article 30. (Constitutional
103rd Amendment Act, 2018)
The amendment aims to provide reservation to those who do not
fall in 15 (5) and 15(4) (effectively, SCs, STs and OBCs).
 …..
1. State of Madras Vs. Champakam Dorairajn. (AIR 1951 SC 226)
Madras Govt, reserved seats in state Medical and Engineering
colleges for different communities on the basis of religion, race
and caste. The said notification was challenged on the ground of
violation of Article 15(1) of the constitution.
The state defended the notification on the ground to promote the
social justice for all sections of the people as required by Article 46
of the Indian Constitution
SC- The notification violates Article 15 of the Indian Constitution
and further held that DPSP cannot override the fundamental
rights.

Article 15 was amended by Constitution

(1st Amendment) Act, 1951 and added Article 15(4)
 ….
After the decisions of the Hon`ble SC IN
1. T.M PAI Foundation V. State of Karnataka (AIR 2003 SC 355)
2. Islamic Acadamy V. State of Karnataka (AIR 2003 SC 3724)
3. P.A. Inamdar V. State of Maharashtra (AIR 2005 SC 3226)
1. Article 15(5) was added

………………………………………………………….

Article 15 (6) is added

(Constitutional 103rd Amendment
Act, 2018)
 ATRICLE: 16. Equality of opportunity in matters of public
employment
(1) There shall be equality of opportunity for all
citizens in matters relating to employment or
appointment to any office under the State,

(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion,

race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth,
residence or any of them, be ineligible for, or
discriminated against in respect of, any
employment or office under the State.
 …..
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent Parliament from
making any law prescribing, in regard to a class or classes
of employment or appointment to an office under the
Government of, or any local or other authority within, a
State or Union territory, any requirement as to residence
within that State or Union territory prior to such
employment or appointment.

(4) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from

making any provision for the reservation of
appointments or posts in favour of any backward class
of citizens which, in the opinion of the State, is not
adequately represented in the services under the State.
 ….
1. M.R.Balaji V. State of Mysore (AIR 1963 SC 649)-
SC- ‘Caste’ of a person cannot be the sole test for ascertaining
whether particular class is backward class or not
2. Devadasan Vs. Union of India (AIR 1965 SC 179)
SC- 4:1 – Struck down the ‘carry forward rule’ as
unconstitutional
3. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, (Mandal Commission Case) AIR
1993 SC 477
SC- OVERULED the decision of SC in Devadasan Vs. Union of India
and held that ‘carry forward rule’ is valid so long as it does not in
a particular year exceeds 50% of vacancies.
 ….
(4A) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any
provision for reservation in matters of promotion, with
consequential seniority, to any class or classes of posts in the
services under the State in favour of Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes which in the opinion of State are not
adequately represented in the services under the State. ( 77th
Amendment 1995)

(4B) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from considering any
unfilled vacancies of a year which are reserved for being filled up in
that year in accordance with any provision for reservation made
under clause (4) or clause (4A) as a separate class of vacancies to be
filled up in any succeeding year or years and such class of vacancies
shall not be considered together with the vacancies of the year in
which they are being filled up for determining the ceiling of fifty
per cent, reservation on total number of vacancies of that year. (
81st Amendment 2000)
 ….
5. Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any
law which provides that the incumbent of an office in
connection with the affairs of any religious or
denominational institution or any member of the
governing body thereof shall be a person professing a
particular religion or belonging to a particular
denomination.

6. Article 16 (6) is added to provide reservations to

people from economically weaker sections in
government posts.
(Constitutional 103rd Amendment Act, 2018)
 ARTICLE 17 AND 18
17. Abolition of Untouchability:
Untouchability is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden
the enforcement of any disability arising out of Untouchability shall
be an offence punishable in accordance with law

18. Abolition of titles:

No title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be
conferred by the State No citizen of India shall accept any title from
any foreign State No person who is not a citizen of India shall, while
he holds any office of profit or trust under the State, accept without
the consent of the President any title from any foreign State No
person holding any office of profit or trust under the State shall,
without the consent of the President, accept any present,
emolument, or office of any kind from or under any foreign State
Right to Freedom
 ARTICLE 19. Protection of certain rights regarding
freedom of speech, etc.
(1) All citizens shall have the right Restrictions
(a) to freedom of speech and expression: - :Article 19(2)
(b) to assemble peaceably and without Arms :Article 19(3)
(c) to form associations or unions; :Article 19(4)
(d) to move freely throughout the territory
of India; :Article 19(5)
(e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory
of India; :Article 19(5)
(f) omitted
(g) to practice any profession, or to carry on any
occupation, trade or business - :Article 19(6)
 ……
However, Freedom of speech and expression is not
absolute. As of now, there are 8 restrictions on the
freedom of speech and expression.
1. Security of the state
2. Friendly relations with foreign states
3. Public Order
4. Decency or morality
5. Contempt of Court
6. Defamation
7. Incitement to offence
8. Sovereignty and integrity of India.
 ….
Ramesh thappar V. State of Madras AIR 1950 SC 124

Ramesh Thapar, a prominent journalist and member of

the communist party. Thapar was the printer, publisher
and editor of an English journal called Cross Roads,
which was printed and published in Bombay.
The Government of Madras, in exercise of their powers
under section 9(1-A) of the Madras Maintenance of
Public Order Act, 1949 purported to issue an order No.
MS.1333 dated 1st March 1950, whereby they
imposed a ban upon the entry and circulation of the
journal in that State. Romesh Thapar approached the
supreme court of India and alleged that this ban was a
violation of his freedom of speech and expression as
guaranteed under Art. 19(1)(a).
 …..

The court stated that the ban would prima

facie constitute a clear violation of the
fundamental right of freedom of speech and
expression unless it could be shown that the
restriction was saved by the exceptions
provided by Art. 19(2) of the Constitution.
 Article -20: Protection in respect of
conviction for offences
(1) No person shall be convicted of any offence except for
violation of the law in force at the time of the
commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be
subjected to a penalty greater than that which might
have been inflicted under the law in force at the time
of the commission of the offence (Ex-post facto law)

(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the

same offence more than once (Double Jeopardy)

(3) No person accused of any offence shall be compelled

to be a witness against himself (No self incrimination
 20(1)
1. Kedhar Nath. Vs. Bengal (AIR 1953 SC 404)
➢ Accused committed an offence in 1947
➢ The act was amended and enhanced the punishment in 1949
for the same offence by imposing additional fine.
➢ SC held –enhanced punishment could not be applicable.

2. T Baral Vs. Henry An Hoe (1983)1 SCC 177

➢ Complaint was filed in 16.08.1975 under section 16(1)(a) r/w s
7 of prevention of food Adulteration Act.- maximum
punishment was imprisonment for life
➢ 01.04.1976 Amended the act and reduced the punishment to 3
years.
➢ SC- accused could take advantage of beneficial provision of
reduced punishment.
 20(2)
1. Venkataraman V. Union of India- AIR 1954 SC
375
➢ Appellant was dismissed as result of
departmental enquiry held under public service
enquiry act, 1960
➢ Later on he was prosecuted for having
committed an offence under PC Act, 1988
➢ SC- held proceedings taken against the
appellant before the enquiry officer is not
prosecution.
 20(3)
Nandini Satpathy V. P.L.Dani. AIR 1977 SC 1025
➢ The appellant was a former CM of Orissa
➢ Certain charges of corruption was alleged against her
➢ She was called upon to the police station in an enquiry
➢ The appellant was refused answer the certan written
questions
➢ She was prosecuted under section 179 of IPC for refusing
to answer the questions
➢ SC-Not to compel or force to answer the questions,
however bound to answer where there is no clear
tendency to criminate.
 A.21
Article 21 states that “No person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to the procedure established by
law.

PERSONAL LIBERTY:
1. A.K.Gopalan V. Union of India (AIR 1950 SC 27)
Petitioner a communist leader was denained under Preventive
Detention Act, 1950. Challenged the P.D.Act, 1950 on the ground
that it violates Article 19 and 21 of Indian Constitution.
SC-Personal liberty under article 21 means nothing more than
the liberty of the physical body, ie freedom from arrest and
detention without the authority of law
 ….
2. In Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (AIR 1978 SC 597)
The Apex Court opened up a new dimension and laid down that
the procedure cannot be
➢ arbitrary,
➢ unfair or
➢ Unreasonable.
Justice Bhagwati used three terms ‘just, fair and reasonable’ while
giving his judgment so that there is no scope of injustice.

3. Oliga Tellis and Ors vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Ors
(1985 SCC (3) 545 ) the court held that the right to life included
right to livelihood.
4. Chameli Singh vs. State of UP (1995 Supp(6) SCR 827)
Right to Shelter- As good as this right guaranteed under Article 21
sounds, as citizens we must provide at least basic shelters to those
who are ignored by government because no human being must be
deprived of food, shelter or water.
 Article 21A: Right to Education
The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002
inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of India to
provide free and compulsory education of all children in
the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental
Right in such a manner as the State may, by law,
determine.

Right to Education Act (RTE) is an Act of the Parliament of

India enacted on 4 August 2009, which describes the
modalities of the importance of free and compulsory
education for children between the age of 6 to 14 years in
India under Article 21A of the Indian Constitution
 Article 22:Safeguards against
arbitrary arrest and detention
(1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being
informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he
be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner
of his choice

(2) Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced
before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty four hours of
such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of
arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained
in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate

(3) Nothing in clauses ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) shall apply

(a) to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien; or
(b) to any person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for
preventive detention
 ….
(4) No law providing for preventive detention shall
authorise the detention of a person for a longer
period than three months unless
- an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are,
or have been, or are qualified to be appointed
as, Judges of a High Court has reported before
the expiration of the said period of three
months that there is in its opinion sufficient
cause for such detention:
….
 3. Right against exploitation
ARTICLE 23 AND 24
The Right against exploitation enshrined in Article 23 and
24 of the Indian Constitution guarantees human dignity and
protect people from any such exploitation
S. 23. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced
labour
(1)Traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms
of forced labour are prohibited and any contravention of
this provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance
with law

1. Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India,

AIR 1982 SC1943.
2. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC
802.
 ….
A. 24. Prohibition of employment of children in factories, etc
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

M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1997 SC 699

Sivakasi was considered as a big offender who was
employing many child labourers. It was engaged in the
manufacturing process of matches and fireworks. The
Court observed, qualified as a hazardous industry. Thus
employing children under the age of 14 years in this
industry is prohibited.
 ARTICLE 25-28
RIGHT TO RELIGION

Article 25 guarantees the freedom of conscience, the

freedom to profess, practice, and propagate religion
to all citizens.

The above-mentioned freedoms are subject to public

order, health, and morality.

This article also gives a provision that the State can

make laws:
– That regulates and restricts any financial, economic,
political, or other secular activity associated with any
religious practice.
 …..
The National Anthem Case
Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala,

The facts of this case were that three children belonging to a sect
(Jehovah’s witness) worshipped only Jehovah (the creator) and
refused to sing the national anthem

According to these, children singing was against the tenets of their

religious faith which did not allow them to sing the national
anthem. These children stood up respectfully in silence daily for the
national anthem but refused to sing because of their honest belief.
A Commission was appointed to enquire about the matter. In the
report, the Commission stated that these children were ‘law-
abiding’ and did not show any disrespect. However, the
headmistress under the instruction of the Dy. Inspector of Schools
expelled the students.
 ……
• The Supreme Court held that the action of the
headmistress of expelling the children from
school for not singing the national anthem was
violative of their freedom of religion.
The fundamental rights guaranteed under Article
19(1)(a) and Article 25(1) has been infringed. It
further held that there is no provision of law
which compels or obligates anyone to sing the
national anthem, it is also not disrespectful if a
person respectfully stands but does not sing the
national anthem.
 ……..
• Appointment of Non-Brahmins as Pujari: N. Aditya v. Travancore
Devaswom Board

The issue, in this case, was whether the appointment of a non-

Malayala Brahmin as ‘Santhikaran’ (Priest or Pujari) of the
Kongorpilly Neerikode Siva Temple at Kerala is violative of the
provisions of the constitution.

• The court held as long as a person is well versed, properly

qualified and trained to perform the puja in an appropriate
manner for the worship of the deity, such a person can be
appointed as ‘Santhikaran’ despite his caste. In the present case, it
was also observed that the temple is not a denomination where
there is a specific form of worship is required.
 …..

Noise pollution in the name of religion

The Supreme Court in Church of God (Full Gospel) v.
K.K.R. Majestic Colony Welfare Association

held that nowhere in any religion, it is mentioned that

prayers should be performed through the beating of
drums or through voice amplifiers which disturbs the
peace and tranquility of others. If there is any such
practice, it should be done without adversely affecting
the rights of others as well as that of not being
disturbed in their activities.
 …….
The Supreme Court in the case of M Ismail
Faruqi v. Union of India

held that the mosque is not an essential part

of Islam. Namaz (Prayer) can be offered by the
Muslims anywhere, in the open as well and it
is not necessary to be offered only in a
mosque.
 ……
Triple Talaq: Shayara Bano v. Union of India
Talaq-e-biddat known as triple talaq, a kind of divorce
through which a Muslim man could divorce his wife by
uttering the words talaq talaq talaq. A 5 judges bench
of the Supreme Court heard the controversial Triple
Talaq case. The main issue, in this case, was whether
the practice of Talaq-e-biddat (triple talaq) is a matter
of faith to the Muslims and whether it is constituent to
their personal law.
By a 3:2 majority, the court ruled that the practice of
Talaq-e-biddat is illegal and unconstitutional. The
court also held that, an injunction would continue to
bar the Muslim male from practicing triple talaq till a
legislation is enacted for that purpose.
 ….
Article 26 : Freedom to manage religious affairs
This Article provides that every religious denomination
has the following rights, subject to morality, health,
and public order.
1. The right to form and maintain institutions for religious
and charitable intents.
2. The right to manage its own affairs in the matter of
religion.
3. The right to acquire the immovable and movable
property.
4. The right to administer such property according to the
law.
 ……
• Article 27
• No person shall be compelled to pay any
taxes, the proceeds of which are specifically
appropriated in payment of expenses for the
promotion or maintenance of any particular
religion or religious denomination.
 ….Article 28
A.28(1) No religious instruction shall be provided in any educational
institution wholly maintained out of State funds.

(2) Nothing in clause (1) shall apply to an educational institution which

is administered by the State but has been established under any
endowment or trust which requires that religious instruction shall
be imparted in such institution.

(3) No person attending any educational institution recognised by

the State or receiving aid out of State funds shall be required to
take part in any religious instruction that may be imparted in such
institution or to attend any religious worship that may be
conducted in such institution or in any premises attached thereto
unless such person or, if such person is a minor, his guardian has
given his consent thereto.
 Article 32: Right to constitutional
remedy
(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the
enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.

(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or
writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate,
for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.

(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by

clauses (1) and (2), Parliament may by law empower any other court to
exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers
exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).

(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as
otherwise provided by this Constitution.
 ….
1. Habeas Corpus
It is one of the important writs for personal
liberty which says “You have the Body”. The main
purpose of this writ is to seek relief from the
unlawful detention of an individual.

ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla

which is also known as the Habeas Corpus case, it
was held that the writ of Habeas Corpus cannot
be suspended even during an emergency (Article
359).
 ………….
2. Quo Warranto

Writ of Quo Warranto implies thereby “By

what means”.

This writ is invoked in cases of public offices

and it is issued to restrain persons from acting
in public office to which he is not entitled to.
 ……
3. Mandamus
Writ of Mandamus means “We Command” in
Latin. This writ is issued for the correct
performance of mandatory and purely
ministerial duties and is issued by a superior
court to a lower court or government officer.
 ……
4. Certiorari
It is issued when there is a wrongful exercise
of the jurisdiction and the decision of the case
is based on it. The writ can be moved to
higher courts like the High Court or the
Supreme Court by the affected parties.
 …..
• 5. Prohibition

It is a writ directing a lower court to stop

doing something which the law prohibits it
from doing.
Its main purpose is to prevent an inferior court
from exceeding its jurisdiction or from acting
contrary to the rules of Natural Justice.
 DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY

The Directive Principles of State Policy of

India (DPSP) are the guidelines
or principles to be kept in citation while
framing laws and policies.
The objective of the DPSPs is to better the
social and economic conditions of society so
people can live a good life
These provisions, contained in Part IV (Article
36–51) of the Constitution of India.
 …..
Article 36. Defines State as same as Article 12 unless the context otherwise
defines.
Article 37. Application of the Principles contained in this part-The
provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court,
Article 38. It authorizes the state to secure a social order for the
promotion of the welfare of people.
Article39. Certain principles of policies to be followed by the state.
Article 39A. Equal justice and free legal aid.
Article 40. Organization of village panchayats.
Article 41. Right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain
cases.
Article 42. Provision for just and humane conditions of work and
maternity leaves.
Article 43. Living wage etc. for workers.
Article 43-A. Participation of workers in management of industries.
 ….
• Article 43-B. Promotion of cooperative societies.
• Article 44. Uniform civil code for the citizens.
• Article 45. Provision for early childhood care and education to children
below the age of six years.
• Article 46. Promotion of education and economic interests of SC, ST, and
other weaker sections.
• Article 47. Duty of the state to raise the level of nutrition and the
standard of living and to improve public health.
• Article 48. Organization of agriculture and animal husbandry.
• Article 48-A. Protection and improvement of environment and
safeguarding of forests and wildlife.
• Article 49. Protection of monuments and places and objects of national
importance.
• Article 50. Separation of judiciary from the executive.
• Article 51. Promotion of international peace and security.
 INTRODUCTION
MEANING
Constitution makers borrowed this concept from
Irish Constitution

Part IV of the Constitution of India deals with

Directive Principles of State Policies.

These DPSPs act as a guideline for the state and

are needed to be taken into consideration while
coming up with any new law but a citizen cannot
compel the state to follow DPSPs.
 ……..
ARTICLE 37
“The provisions contained in this Part shall not be
enforceable by any court, but the principles
therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental
in the governance of the country and it shall be
the duty of the State to apply these principles in
making laws.”

Fundamental Rights are the legal obligation of

the state to respect, whereas the DPSPs is the
moral obligation of the state to follow.
 Article 38
Article 38 lay down the broad ideals which a
state should strive to achieve. Many of these
Directive Principles have become enforceable
by becoming a law. Some of the DPSPs have
widened the scope of Fundamental Rights.
 Directive principles and Fundamental rights

In Keshavnanda Bharati vs the State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225),

The Apex Court placed DPSPs on the higher pedestal than Fundamental
Rights.

In Minerva Mills vs Union of India (AIR 1980 SC 1789) ,

The question before the court was whether the directive principles of
State policy enshrined in Art IV can have primacy over the fundamental
rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution. The court held that the
doctrine of harmonious construction should be applied because neither
of the two has precedence to each other. Both are complementary
therefore they are needed to be balanced.
In Unnikrishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) 1 SCC 645
The Court was of the view that Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles are not exclusive to each other therefore they should not be
read in exclusion.
THE FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES OF CITIZENS WERE ADDED TO THE CONSTITUTION BY
THE 42ND AMENDMENT IN 1976,
ARTICLE 51A

(a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National
Flag and the National Anthem;

(b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for
freedom;

(c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;

(d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;

(e) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the
people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional
diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women;

(f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;
 ….
(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests,
lakes, rivers and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures;

(h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry
and reform;

(i) to safeguard public property and to abjure violence;

(j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective

activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour
and achievement.

(k) to provide opportunities for education by the parent the guardian, to

his child, or a ward between the age of 6-14 years as the case may be.
(86th amendment Act,2002)
 ….
Bijoe Emmanuel vs State of Kerala ( National anthem case)
The facts of the case:
• The case pertains to 3 students – Bijou, Binu Mol and Bindu Emmanuel
who studied in a school in Kerala.
• They attended the school everyday and even participated in the school
assembly.
• However, when the National Anthem was sung, they didn’t sing the
National Anthem along with the other students but stood in attention.
• Their two elder sisters also studied in the same school and followed the
same practice and nobody ever objected to it.
• One day in July 1985, a member of the legislative assembly attended the
assembly and noticed that the 3 children were not singing the National
Anthem and he thought that this behaviour of theirs was unpatriotic.
• He raised this question in the Assembly and a commission was set up to
investigate the matter. The commission reported that the children were
well behaved and law-abiding and did not ever show any disrespect to the
National Anthem.
 ….
• However, the Head Mistress expelled the students from the school under
the instructions of the Deputy Inspector of Schools.
• The father of the children requested the headmistress to allow the
children to attend their classes in school till they received a government
order/decision in the matter. The Headmistress expressed her inability to
do so.
• The objection of the Emmanuel children was not the language or the
sentiments of the National Anthem. They did not sing the National
Anthem, but they always stood in when the National Anthem was sung to
show their respect to it. They did not sing only because of their belief and
conviction that their religion did not permit them to join any rituals except
it be in their prayers to Jehovah, their God.
• Since the appellants were prevented from attending the school, they
sought a restraining order passed by the authorities. However, their writ
petition was first rejected by a single learned judge and then the division
bench also rejected the prayer of the children.
• After this, the case was appealed by the father, in the Supreme Court
through a special leave petition in pursuant of Article 136 of the
Constitution
 ….
SC
Supreme Court held that the three students
were not guilty of disrespect to the National
Anthem just because they refused to sing it.
Moreover, they did stand in respect
whenever the National Anthem was being
sung.