Module 2

Fundamental Rights

Fundamental Rights are the cornerstone of any democratic society, enshrined in the Constitution
to safeguard the liberties and dignity of every individual. In the Indian context, these rights are
outlined in Part III of the Constitution, encompassing Articles 12 to 35. They serve as a bulwark
against any form of state tyranny and are pivotal for the overall development of individuals,
allowing them to lead a life of freedom, equality, and respect.

These rights include:

1. Right to Equality (Articles 14-18): This right ensures that every citizen is treated
equally before the law, without any discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste,
sex, or place of birth. It also abolishes untouchability and prohibits titles except military
and academic distinctions.
2. Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22): This set of rights provides citizens with the freedom
of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and the right to
practice any profession. It also includes protection in respect of conviction for offences,
protection of life and personal liberty, and the rights of individuals in case of arrest and
detention.
3. Right against Exploitation (Articles 23-24): This right prohibits all forms of forced
labour, child labour, and human trafficking, ensuring that no individual is exploited or
subjected to work against their will.
4. Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28): This right allows individuals to practice,
profess, and propagate any religion of their choice. It also provides for the freedom to
manage religious affairs and ensures that no person is compelled to pay taxes for the
promotion of any particular religion.
 5. Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30): These rights protect the interests of
minorities by allowing them to preserve their culture, language, and script. They also
grant minorities the right to establish and administer their educational institutions.
6. Right to Constitutional Remedies (Articles 32-35): Described by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
as the "heart and soul of the Constitution," this right empowers citizens to approach the
Supreme Court or High Courts if they believe that any of their Fundamental Rights have
been violated. The courts can issue various writs, such as habeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari, to enforce these rights.

Fundamental Rights are designed to ensure that individuals can lead their lives with dignity, free
from oppression and discrimination. They are essential for the functioning of a democratic
society, where every citizen is respected and given the opportunity to contribute to the nation's
development.

Fundamental Duties

Fundamental Duties, though often less highlighted than Fundamental Rights, play an equally
important role in the Constitution. Added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, these duties are
listed in Article 51A and serve as a moral obligation for every citizen to contribute positively to
the nation.

There are 11 Fundamental Duties, which include:

1. Respecting the Constitution and its ideals and institutions, the National Flag, and the
National Anthem.
2. Cherishing and following the noble ideals that inspired the national struggle for freedom.
3. Upholding and protecting the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.
4. Defending the country and rendering national service when called upon to do so.
5. Promoting harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood among all people of India,
transcending religious, linguistic, and regional or sectional diversities; renouncing
practices derogatory to the dignity of women.
6. Valuing and preserving the rich heritage of the country's composite culture.
 7. Protecting and improving the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and
wildlife, and having compassion for living creatures.
8. Developing the scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform.
9. Safeguarding public property and abjuring violence.
10. Striving towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the
nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement.
11. Providing opportunities for education to children between the ages of 6 and 14 years.

Although these duties are not legally enforceable, they serve as a reminder that with every right
comes a corresponding responsibility. The purpose of including Fundamental Duties is to
encourage a sense of discipline and commitment among citizens, fostering a spirit of patriotism
and a willingness to contribute to the nation's progress.

The Directive Principles of State Policy

The Directive Principles of State Policy, enshrined in Part IV of the Constitution (Articles 36-
51), are non-justiciable guidelines that aim to create a social order characterised by social,
economic, and political justice. These principles are inspired by the Irish Constitution and reflect
the ideals of social and economic democracy.

The Directive Principles can be broadly classified into three categories:

1. Socialistic Principles: These principles aim to create a welfare state by ensuring that
wealth is not concentrated in the hands of a few, providing adequate means of livelihood
to all citizens, and promoting the well-being of all, particularly the weaker sections of
society. This includes securing social justice, equal pay for equal work, and the right to
work, education, and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness, and
disablement.
2. Gandhian Principles: These principles are based on the teachings of Mahatma Gandhi
and include promoting cottage industries, organising village panchayats, ensuring a living
wage and humane conditions of work, and prohibiting the consumption of intoxicating
drinks and drugs.
 3. Liberal-Intellectual Principles: These principles focus on providing free and
compulsory education to children, promoting international peace and security,
maintaining the judiciary's independence, and protecting the environment and
monuments of national importance.

While the Directive Principles are not enforceable by law, they are fundamental in the
governance of the country. They serve as a yardstick for measuring the performance of the
government in ensuring the well-being of its citizens. The Supreme Court has held that while
these principles cannot override Fundamental Rights, they should be harmoniously interpreted
with them to achieve the goals of justice, liberty, and equality.

Classification and Scope of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental Rights are classified into different categories, each addressing specific aspects of
individual liberty and protection. The scope of these rights is vast, covering various areas of
human life and ensuring that individuals are treated with dignity and respect.

1. Right to Equality: This right includes equality before the law, the prohibition of
discrimination on various grounds, equality of opportunity in public employment, the
abolition of untouchability, and the abolition of titles. It ensures that all citizens are
treated equally and have equal access to opportunities without facing any discrimination.
2. Right to Freedom: This right encompasses various freedoms, including the freedom of
speech and expression, the right to assemble peacefully without arms, the right to form
associations or unions, the right to move freely throughout the territory of India, the right
to reside and settle in any part of India, and the right to practice any profession or to carry
on any occupation, trade, or business. It also includes protection in respect of conviction
for offences and protection of life and personal liberty.
3. Right against Exploitation: This right aims to eliminate all forms of exploitation,
including forced labour, human trafficking, and child labour. It ensures that no individual
is subjected to exploitation and that their dignity is upheld.
4. Right to Freedom of Religion: This right allows individuals to freely practice, profess,
and propagate their religion. It also includes the freedom to manage religious affairs and
 ensures that no person is compelled to pay taxes for the promotion of any particular
religion. This right is essential for maintaining religious harmony and ensuring that
individuals can follow their beliefs without fear of persecution.
5. Cultural and Educational Rights: These rights protect the interests of minorities,
allowing them to preserve their culture, language, and script. They also grant minorities
the right to establish and administer their educational institutions, ensuring that their
cultural identity is preserved and that they have access to quality education.
6. Right to Constitutional Remedies: This right allows individuals to seek redressal from
the courts if their Fundamental Rights are violated. It empowers the judiciary to issue
writs for the enforcement of these rights and ensures that individuals have access to
justice. This right is crucial for maintaining the rule of law and ensuring that individuals'
rights are protected.

Enforcement of Fundamental Rights

The enforcement of Fundamental Rights is a crucial aspect of their effectiveness. The

Constitution provides individuals with the right to approach the Supreme Court or High Courts if
they believe their rights have been violated. The judiciary plays a pivotal role in ensuring that
these rights are upheld and protected.

The Supreme Court and High Courts can issue various writs to enforce Fundamental Rights,
including:

1. Habeas Corpus: This writ is used to secure the release of a person who has been
unlawfully detained. It ensures that no individual is deprived of their liberty without due
process of law.
2. Mandamus: This writ is issued to a public official or body to perform a duty that they
are legally obligated to perform. It ensures that public officials do not neglect their duties.
3. Prohibition: This writ is issued to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding
its jurisdiction or acting contrary to the law.
4. Quo Warranto: This writ is issued to challenge the legality of a person's claim to a
public office. It ensures that only legally qualified individuals hold public office.
 5. Certiorari: This writ is issued to a lower court or tribunal to transfer a case to a higher
court for review. It ensures that justice is served by correcting any errors made by lower
courts.

The judiciary's role in enforcing Fundamental Rights is vital for ensuring that individuals'
liberties are protected. The courts have expanded the scope of these rights through various
landmark judgments by interpreting the Constitution in a dynamic and progressive manner. For
instance, the Supreme Court has broadened the interpretation of the right to life under Article 21
to include not just mere survival, but also the right to live with dignity, access to clean air and
water, and the right to privacy. In cases like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Court
held that any law affecting personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable, thereby
strengthening the protection of individual rights. Similarly, in the Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan
(1997) case, the Court recognised the right to a safe working environment for women under the
right to life and dignity, leading to the formulation of guidelines against sexual harassment at the
workplace. These landmark judgments illustrate how the judiciary has played a crucial role in
not only protecting but also expanding the scope of Fundamental Rights to adapt to changing
societal needs and challenges.

Limitations and Restrictions on Fundamental Rights

While Fundamental Rights are crucial for safeguarding individual freedoms and promoting
equality and justice, they are not absolute. The Constitution of India allows for certain reasonable
restrictions to be placed on these rights to maintain public order, morality, the sovereignty and
integrity of the country, and other essential aspects of governance. These limitations are
necessary to balance individual rights with the collective interests of society.

1. Public Order: The state can impose restrictions on Fundamental Rights to ensure public
order. For instance, the freedom of speech and expression can be curtailed if it is likely to
incite violence, unrest, or disrupt the peace of society. Similarly, the right to assemble
peacefully can be restricted if the assembly poses a threat to public order.
2. Morality: The state has the authority to impose restrictions on Fundamental Rights in the
interest of maintaining public morality. For example, the right to freedom of expression
 does not extend to the promotion of obscene content or material that offends public
decency. This ensures that individual freedoms do not lead to moral degradation or the
erosion of societal values.
3. Sovereignty and Integrity of the State: The Constitution allows for restrictions on
Fundamental Rights to protect the sovereignty and integrity of the nation. Any activity or
expression that threatens the unity of the country or promotes secessionist ideologies can
be restricted. This is particularly relevant in cases of sedition, where speech or actions
that incite rebellion against the state can be curtailed.
4. Security of the State: National security is a paramount concern, and the state can impose
restrictions on Fundamental Rights to safeguard it. For example, during times of war or
emergency, certain rights such as the freedom of speech and movement may be restricted
to prevent the dissemination of sensitive information or to ensure the safety of citizens.
5. Friendly Relations with Foreign States: The state can also impose restrictions on
Fundamental Rights to maintain friendly relations with foreign countries. For instance,
speech or expression that criticises a foreign state in a manner that jeopardises diplomatic
relations can be curtailed.
6. Contempt of Court: The freedom of speech and expression is subject to the limitation
that it should not undermine the authority of the judiciary. Any speech or action that is
deemed to be in contempt of court, such as defamation of a judge or disobedience of a
court order, can be restricted.
7. Defamation: The right to freedom of speech and expression does not include the right to
defame others. The state can impose restrictions to protect individuals' reputations from
false and harmful statements. This ensures that freedom of expression is exercised
responsibly and does not harm others' dignity or social standing.
8. Incitement to an Offence: Speech or expression that incites individuals to commit an
offence, such as violence, riot, or criminal activities, can be restricted by the state. This
limitation ensures that individual freedoms are not misused to provoke unlawful actions
that disrupt social harmony.
9. Reasonable Restrictions: The term "reasonable restrictions" is significant because it
implies that any limitation on Fundamental Rights must be justified and proportionate to
the aim it seeks to achieve. The judiciary plays a critical role in determining whether a
 restriction is reasonable by balancing individual rights against the interests of the state
and society.

These limitations are not meant to undermine the significance of Fundamental Rights but to
ensure that they are exercised in a manner that does not harm the collective interests of society.
The courts have the authority to review the validity of any restriction and ensure that it is
reasonable and in line with the principles of justice.

Role of Judiciary in Protecting Fundamental Rights

The judiciary plays a pivotal role in the protection and enforcement of Fundamental Rights in
India. As the guardian of the Constitution, the judiciary is entrusted with the responsibility of
ensuring that the rights of individuals are upheld and protected from any arbitrary actions by the
state or other entities. This role is primarily carried out through judicial review and the
interpretation of the Constitution.

1. Judicial Review: Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine the
constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. If any law or action violates
Fundamental Rights, the judiciary has the authority to declare it null and void. This
ensures that the government operates within the boundaries set by the Constitution and
that citizens' rights are not infringed upon.
2. Writ Jurisdiction: The Constitution empowers the Supreme Court under Article 32 and
the High Courts under Article 226 to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental
Rights. The various writs—habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and
certiorari—are powerful tools used by the judiciary to protect individuals' rights and
ensure justice.
o Habeas Corpus: This writ is used to challenge unlawful detention and secure the
release of a person who has been detained without legal justification.
o Mandamus: This writ is issued to compel a public official or authority to perform
a duty that they are legally obligated to perform.
o Prohibition: This writ is issued by a higher court to prevent a lower court or
tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to the law.
 o Quo Warranto: This writ is used to challenge the legality of a person holding a
public office and to remove them if their appointment is found to be unlawful.
o Certiorari: This writ is issued by a higher court to review and correct the legal
errors made by a lower court or tribunal.
3. Interpretation of the Constitution: The judiciary has the authority to interpret the
Constitution, and over the years, it has expanded the scope of Fundamental Rights
through landmark judgments. For example, the right to life under Article 21 has been
interpreted to include the right to privacy, the right to a clean environment, and the right
to live with dignity. This dynamic interpretation ensures that Fundamental Rights evolve
with changing societal needs and challenges.
4. Protection of Fundamental Rights during Emergencies: The judiciary also plays a
crucial role in protecting Fundamental Rights during emergencies. While certain rights
may be suspended during a national emergency, the judiciary ensures that any suspension
is within the limits prescribed by the Constitution and that citizens' rights are not unduly
violated.
5. Public Interest Litigation (PIL): The judiciary has made it easier for individuals to seek
redressal for violations of Fundamental Rights through the mechanism of Public Interest
Litigation. PIL allows any individual or group to approach the courts on behalf of those
whose rights have been violated but who may not be in a position to approach the courts
themselves. This has been a significant development in ensuring that justice is accessible
to all, especially the marginalised and vulnerable sections of society.
6. Landmark Judgments: The judiciary has delivered numerous landmark judgments that
have reinforced the protection of Fundamental Rights. For instance, in the case of
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), the Supreme Court established the
"basic structure" doctrine, which holds that the basic structure of the Constitution,
including Fundamental Rights, cannot be altered by any amendment. In Maneka Gandhi
v. Union of India (1978), the Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21,
emphasising that any law affecting personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.
The judiciary's role in protecting Fundamental Rights is indispensable to the functioning of a
democratic society. It acts as a check on the powers of the legislature and executive, ensuring
that individual freedoms are not curtailed arbitrarily and that justice prevails.

Fundamental Rights vs. Directive Principles of State Policy

Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are two essential components of the
Indian Constitution, each serving a distinct purpose in the governance of the country. While they
complement each other in many ways, there are also points of tension between them.
Understanding their relationship is crucial for grasping the broader constitutional framework.

1. Nature and Enforceability: Fundamental Rights are justiciable, meaning they can be
enforced by the courts. If any individual's rights are violated, they have the right to seek
redressal from the judiciary. Directive Principles, on the other hand, are non-justiciable;
they are guidelines for the state to follow in the governance of the country. While they
are not enforceable by law, they are fundamental in the governance of the country and
serve as a blueprint for creating a just and equitable society.
2. Purpose and Scope: Fundamental Rights primarily focus on protecting individual
freedoms and ensuring that citizens can live with dignity and equality. They are aimed at
preventing the state from encroaching on individual liberties. Directive Principles,
however, are broader in scope, aiming to create social and economic conditions that will
enable citizens to lead fulfilling lives. They focus on the welfare of the community as a
whole, including ensuring that basic needs such as education, healthcare, and social
security are met.
3. Conflict and Harmonisation: There have been instances where Fundamental Rights and
Directive Principles have come into conflict. For example, the right to property, which
was once a Fundamental Right, often conflicted with the state's efforts to redistribute land
to achieve social justice, as outlined in the Directive Principles. The Supreme Court, in
various judgments, has tried to harmonise these two aspects by ensuring that Directive
Principles do not override Fundamental Rights but are implemented in a way that
complements them.
In the Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967) case, the Supreme Court held that
Fundamental Rights cannot be abridged or taken away by amending the Constitution to
implement Directive Principles. However, this stance was modified in the Kesavananda
Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case, where the Court introduced the "basic structure"
doctrine, allowing amendments that do not alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
The "basic structure" doctrine asserts that while Parliament has wide powers to amend the
Constitution, it cannot alter or destroy its fundamental features, including Fundamental
Rights. This ruling created a balance between the need to uphold Fundamental Rights and
the necessity to implement Directive Principles, ensuring that both aspects are
harmoniously integrated without compromising the core values of the Constitution. Thus,
while Directive Principles are important for guiding the state's policy-making, they must
be implemented in a manner that respects and preserves the essential features of the
Constitution, including the protection of individual liberties.