Our preamble clearly provides within itself the terms justice, liberty equality fraternity and the dignity of

an individual. In order to attain these various goals the part III,IV, and IVA pose a significant role where
the first one tries to imbibe negative obligations upon the state to not to interfere with the rights and
liberty of the citizens, the part IV which deals with directive Principles of State Policy pose a positive
obligation upon the state to create or an act any laws as it deems fit for the Welfare of its citizens. The
part 4A deals with the fundamental duties that an individual owes towards the other individuals as well
as the nation. The three parts are so interconnected with each other that without the help of one the
others are not only incomplete but are unattainable.

Article 12: Definition of state

According to this article the following comes within the Ambit of state:

1. The government and Parliament of India

2. State legislature

3. All local or other authorities

a. That constitute within the territory of India

b. That are governed or are under the control of government of India

Just like various other concepts, the concept of fundamental rights has also been adopted from the
western ideology. Unlike other legal rights, refundamental rights can only be claimed against the state
and hence ricardless of the fact that it may or may not be expressly stated in the constitution such
fundamental rights are available only against the state. This position has been brought through various
judicial pronouncements.

In P.D. Shamadsani v. Central Bank of India the supreme court while providing an emphasis on article 19
and its setting within part 3 clearly stated that the intent of article 19 was to protect the rights or
freedom of an individual against the state action and that the violation of rights of property by
individuals is not within the purview of that particular article.

However there is also a concept of horizontal application of fundamental rights where the stance of
these fundamental rights to be sought against the state and that of an individual comes to an equal
footing. This concept was brought owing the possibility that such definition of state cannot be misused
restricting the application of fundamental rights only against the state where these various state
authorities can do such violation directly or indirectly. In the latter case as well where there is indirect
participation of state for violation of fundamental rights, that does not absolved the state from escaping
its liability for protection of fundamental rights.

This stance was also taken in the case of patanjali Shastri where the supreme court stated that the hole
object of part 3 of the constitution is to provide protection for freedom and rights mentioned their
against the arbitrary invasion of state. Hence the ambit of the fundamental rights is quite wider where
with ongoing legal developments the idea of horizontal application of fundamental rights is being
adopted by the courts widening its Ambit.