1.

Whether a writ petition against CoolConnect by or on behalf of Daksh, a foreign

citizen, would be admissible under article 32 of the Avarnian Constitution?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble supreme court of Avarnian that the writ petition
against coolconnect filed by Daksh , a foreign citizen ,is admissible under article 32 of the
avarnian constitution before this Hon’ble Court.

1.1: Under the constitution of india writ petition can be filed by both citizens and non citizens

There are articles in part -III which are available to any person :

Article 14: Equality before law—The State shall not deny to any person equality before the
law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

Article 18: Abolition of titles—

(1) No title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State.

(2) No citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign State.

(3) 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.

(4) 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."

Article 18 Applies to both citizens and non-citizens, as it addresses the prohibition of titles
being conferred by the State and the acceptance of titles by individuals, regardless of their
citizenship status. However, there are certain distinctions made in clauses (2), (3), and (4)
regarding the acceptance of titles by citizens of India and non-citizens in specific situations.

Article 20: Protection in respect of conviction for offences— (1) No person shall be
convicted of any offence except for violation of a 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. (2)
No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. (3) No
person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
Article 21A of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to education for all children
between the ages of six to fourteen years. The provision explicitly states that "the State shall
provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years,"
without specifying citizenship status.

Therefore, this right to education applies to both citizens and non-citizens within the
territorial jurisdiction of India. The Constitution does not make a distinction between citizens
and non-citizens in this regard, ensuring that all children within the specified age range have
access to free and compulsory education.

Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty —No person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty except according to procedure established by law

Article 22 of the Indian Constitution primarily deals with the protection against arrest and
detention in certain cases.

Clause (1) and (2): These clauses lay down provisions ensuring that any person, regardless of
citizenship status, who is arrested has the right to be informed of the grounds for arrest, the
right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner, and the right to be produced before a
magistrate within 24 hours of arrest.

Clause (3): This clause specifies exceptions to the provisions of clauses (1) and (2). Sub-
clause (a) exempts "enemy aliens" from the protection of these clauses. This term typically
refers to individuals who are citizens of countries with which India is at war or in a state of
hostilities. Therefore, this exception applies to non-citizens. Sub-clause (b) excludes persons
arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention. This could apply to
both citizens and non-citizens depending on the specific law under which they are detained.

Clause (4): This clause sets limits on preventive detention and applies to both citizens and
non-citizens. It specifies that preventive detention beyond three months is subject to review
by an Advisory Board consisting of qualified individuals.

Clause (5) and (6): These clauses pertain to the communication of grounds for detention and
the right to make representations against the order of detention. They apply to both citizens
and non-citizens who are detained under laws providing for preventive detention.
Clause (7): This clause grants Parliament the power to prescribe circumstances, classes of
cases, maximum periods of detention, and procedures for inquiries. These provisions can be
applied to both citizens and non-citizens depending on the laws enacted by Parliament.

while there are certain exceptions and provisions specific to preventive detention, the
overarching principles of Article 22 generally apply to both citizens and non-citizens,
ensuring protection against arbitrary arrest and detention.

Articles 23 and 24 of the Indian Constitution primarily deal with the fundamental rights of
individuals and the prohibition of certain practices such as human trafficking and forced
labor. However, these rights are available to all individuals within the territory of India,
regardless of their citizenship status. foreign citizens residing in India are also entitled to the
protections provided by Articles 23 and 24. These articles ensure that no person, whether
Indian or foreign, is subjected to practices such as trafficking, bonded labor, or forced labor
within the territory of India. while Articles 23 and 24 do not explicitly mention citizenship
status, they apply to all individuals within the territorial jurisdiction of India, including
foreign citizens.

Article 25: Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.-
(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all
persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practice
and propagate religion.

Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs—Subject to public order, morality and
health, every religious denomination or any section thereof shall have the right-(a) to
establish and maintain institutions for religious and charitable purposes; (b) to manage its
own affairs in matters of religion; (c) to own and acquire movable and immovable property;
and (d) to administer such property in accordance with law

The provision under Article 27 of the Indian Constitution applies to both citizens and non-
citizens. It states that "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". This means that it is unlawful to favour,
patronize, or encourage one religion over another through taxation2. The term “no person” is
inclusive of both citizens and non-citizens.
Article 28: Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain
educational institutions- 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.

32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by Part III of Indian constitution

(1)The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of
the rights conferred by the Part III 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 warrant and certiorari, whichever
may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by the Part III.

(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 ill 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
for by this Constitution.

Explanation: Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right that guarantees the
right to constitutional remedies. It is considered one of the most crucial provisions in the
Constitution as it empowers individuals to seek protection and enforcement of their
fundamental rights directly from the Supreme Court of India. Is available to all persons,
including foreigners. It is a crucial constitutional remedy that ensures access to justice for
everyone.
Petition under Article 32 : No petition under Article 32 is maintainable unless it is shown
that the petitioner has some fundamental right

As fundamental rights guaranteed under articles 14,18,20,21,21-A,22-28,32 are available to

both citizens and non-citizens. These rights are available to Daksh as he is a seventeen-year-
old first-year law student who recently moved back to his hometown with his parents to study
law as a foreign citizen at the Sui Generis Law Institute, Avarna. It is visible that Daksh as a
petitioner has some fundamental rights and petition under article 32 is maintainable. from this
I conclude that writ petition can be filed by both citizens and non-citizens

1.1.1 : Article 21 is available to non- citizens as well

Article 21 of the Indian constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, has been
interpreted broadly by judiciary to include various aspects.

Right to Live with Dignity: The right to life is not just about the right to survive. It also entails being
able to live a complete life of dignity and meaning.

Right to Livelihood: The right to livelihood is included under the right to life. This means that no one
can be unfairly prevented from making a living.

Right to a Healthy Environment: The right to a healthy environment is also part of the right to life.
This includes the right to live in pollution-free environments.

Right to Personal Liberty: Article 21 protects the personal liberty of individuals. It states that no
person shall be deprived of their personal liberty except according to the procedure established by
law.

Right against Solitary Confinement, Handcuffing & Bar Fetters, and Delayed Execution: The right
against solitary confinement, handcuffing & bar fetters, and delayed execution are also covered
under Article 21.

Right to Shelter: The right to shelter is also covered under Article 21.

Right to Health: The right to health is also included under Article 21.

Right to Free Education until the Age of 14: The right to free education until the age of 14 is also
covered under Article 21.
Right to Privacy: The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal
liberty.

Right against Noise Pollution: The right against noise pollution is also covered under Article 21.

Right against Custodial Violence and Death in Police Lock-ups or Encounters: The right against
custodial violence and death in police lock-ups or encounters is also covered under Article 21.

Right against Public Hanging: The right against public hanging is also covered under Article 21.

Doctors’ Assistance: Doctors’ assistance is also covered under Article 21.

Article 21 Applies to natural persons. The right is available to every person, citizen or alien.
Thus, even a foreigner can claim this right.

In the case of Francis Coralie Mullin v. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981):,
the Supreme Court held that Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal
liberty, applies to all persons, including non-citizens. The Court emphasized that fundamental
rights are available to any person within the territory of India, irrespective of their nationality.

In Louis De Raedt v. Union of India [(1991) 3 SCC 554] and Khudiram Chakma's case this
court held that foreigners are entitled to the protection of Article 21 of the Constitution.

In the case of National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996): the
Supreme Court reiterated that the protection of fundamental rights is not limited to Indian
citizens alone. It held that any person, including non-citizens, whose fundamental rights are
violated, can approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 for appropriate remedies.

In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Although not directly related to non-citizens, this
case is noteworthy for its impact on the protection of fundamental rights of women, including
non-citizen women, in India. The Supreme Court recognized that sexual harassment violates
the fundamental rights of women under Articles 14, 19, and 21. The principles established in
this case have been applied to protect the rights of non-citizen women as well.

In Kamil Siedczynski vs. Union of India and Another the calcutta high court It emphasized
that the right to life under Article 21 extends to all individuals, including non-citizens.
Jonathan Baud v State of Kerala, the Kerala High Court held that Article 21 of the
Constitution is applicable to a foreigner as well as the foreigner concerned continues to stay
in India. It was held that since the appellant had addressed a meeting organized by a political
group, he could not be treated as a radical and could not be confined to jail.

1.1.2: Right to privacy as part of Article 21 is available to Non -citizens

Right to Privacy is an integral part of Right to Life and Personal Liberty guaranteed in Article
21 of the Constitution.
IN K.S Puttaswamy & Another vs. Union of India and Others [Writ Petition (civil) No. 494
of 2012] 4 . The Court in a landmark judgement on 24 August, 2017 unanimously ruled that
privacy is a fundamental right, and that the right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of
the right to life and personal liberty, as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III of the
Constitution. The Bench also ruled that the right to privacy is not absolute, but is subject to
reasonable restrictions (as is every other fundamental right).

Implications of the Judgement The historic fallout of the nine-judge Bench judgment,
declaring privacy as intrinsic to life and liberty and an inherent right protected by Part III of
the Constitution, is that an ordinary man can now directly approach the Supreme Court and
the High Courts for violation of his fundamental right under the Constitution.

By making privacy an intrinsic part of life and liberty under Article 21, it is not just a citizen,
but anyone, whether an Indian national or not, can move the constitutional courts of the land
under Articles 32 and 226, respectively, to get justice.
In the case of District Registrar and Collector v. Canara Bank (2005): the Supreme Court held
that the right to privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court observed that the right to privacy is available to all persons, including non-citizens

I conclude that as fundamental right to privacy is also available to foreigners in India on this
ground Daksh has the right to file writ petition as his right to privacy have been infringed
1.2: Daksh has a locus standi as a resident of India

one of the essential requirements for filing a Writ Petition is the presence of locus standi, i.e.,
a legal standing to bring the matter before the court. Though Daksh is a foreign citizen, his
locus standi arises from

a)Residency: As a resident of India, Daksh have availed himself of the protection and
benefits extended by the Indian legal system, including fundamental rights guaranteed by the
Constitution.

Factors indicating Daksh residence in India may include:

Enrollment in educational institutions, such as schools or universities, in India

Having social connections and ties in India, such as family members or close friends.

b) Jurisdiction: The social media platform COOL CONNECT operate within the jurisdiction
of India. Therefore, any violation of Daksh fundamental rights occurring within this
jurisdiction falls under the purview of the Indian legal system.

C)Universal Application: The right to privacy is a fundamental human right recognized

universally. As a foreign citizen residing in India, I should be entitled to the same protection
of this right as Indian citizens.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR): The UDHR, although not binding in
nature, recognizes the right to privacy as a fundamental human right. India, as a signatory to
the UDHR, has an obligation to protect and uphold the rights enshrined in it, irrespective of
the nationality of the individual.

1.3: cool connect is a company whether foreign citizen can file against company

In Kaushal Kishor vs. The State Of Uttar Pradesh Govt. and Ors.” decided on January 3,
2023. In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India held that the fundamental rights
under Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution are enforceable against private
individuals and entities, not just the state and its instrumentalities. This means that these
rights can be invoked against private individuals and entities.
Justice V. Ramasubramanian, who authored the judgment, and Justices S. Abdul Nazeer,
B.R. Gavai, and A.S. Bopanna, held that the government had the responsibility of protecting
citizens from both the state and non-state actors when it came to Article 21. Justice B.V.
Nagarathna dissented

Daksh fundamental night to privacy is violated by cool connect. In Kaushal kishor vs. The
state of Uttar pradesh it was held that fundamental rights under Article and 21 of the Indian
Constitution. are enforceable against private individuals and entities, not Just the state and its
instrumentalities. As Article 21 is available to Non-citizens. In facts it was mentioned that
Daksh is or foreign citizen. As his right to privacy which is an integral part of Right to Life
and Personal Liberty guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution is violated by cool connect
a private entity he can take action to protect and enforce his rights against them and also Can
Seek legal recourse to Uphold his rights.

Hence it is submitted before hon’ble court that the writ petition against Coolconnect filed by
Daksh , a foreign citizen ,is admissible under article 32 of the Avarnian constitution before
this Hon’ble Court.