Rule of Law in India- An understanding

Subarno Das (Roll: 245)1

The expression 'Rule of Law' has been derived from the French phrase 'la principle de
legalite', i.e. a governance based on the principles of law. The Rule of law, according to
Garner, is often used simply to describe the words, the term 'rule of law' indicates the state of
affairs in a country where, in main, the law rules. In India, the meaning of rule of law has
been much expanded. The Honourable Supreme Court in furtherance of the basic principles
as laid down by A.V. Dicey has further enunciated and illustrated through its judgements. It
is regarded as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and, therefore, it cannot be
abrogated or destroyed even by Parliament. The ideals of constitution; liberty, equality and
fraternity have been enshrined in the preamble2.

The Doctrine of the Rule of Law has laid down the basis for administrative law. It was
expounded for the first time by Sri Edward Coke, and was developed by Prof. A.V. Dicey in
his book 'The law of the Constitution' published in 1885. According to Prof. Dicey, rule of
law contains three principles or it has three meanings as stated below:

1. Supremacy of Law, 2. Equality before Law 3. Predominance of Legal Spirit

1. Supremacy of Law: The First meaning of the Rule of Law is that 'no man is punishable or
can lawfully be made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law
established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land. It implies that
a man may be punished for .a breach of law but cannot be punished for anything else. No
man can be punished except for a breach of law3. An alleged offence is required to be proved
before the ordinary courts in accordance with the ordinary procedure4.

2. Equality before Law: - The Second meaning of the Rule of Law is that no man is above
law. Every man whatever is his rank or condition is subject to the ordinary law of the realm
and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals. Prof. Dicey states that, there must
be equality before the law or equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land.
He criticised the French legal system of “Droit” administration in which th ere were separate

1
Sem: VI Sec: B, NUSRL Ranchi
2
AIR 1973 SC 1461, Kesavanda Bharti vs. State of Kerala - The Supreme Court enunciated the rule of law as one
of the most important aspects of the doctrine of basic structure.
3
AIR 2000 SC 1121, Yusuf Khan v. Manohar Joshi in which the SC laid down the proposition that it is the duty
of the state to preserve and protect the law and the constitution and that it cannot permit any violent act
which may negate the rule of law.
1969 AIR 33 ,Chief settle e t Co r; Pu ja . O Prakash , it as o ser ed y the “upre e ourt that, I
4

our constitutional system, the central and most characteristic feature is the concept of rule of law which
means, in the present context, the authority of law courts to test all administrative action by the standard of
legality. The administrative or executive action that does not meet the standard will be set aside if the
aggrieved person brings the matter into notice.
administrative tribunals for deciding the cases of State Officials and citizens separately. He
criticises such system as negation of law

3. Predominance of Legal Spirit: - The Third meaning of the rule of law is that the general
principles of the constitution are the result of juridical decisions determining file rights of
private persons in particular cases brought before the Court5.

As mentioned before Dicey’s theory of rule of law has been adopted and incorporated in the
Indian Constitution. Any violation as such of the rule of law as enunciated by the
Constitution is protected by the High Courts and the Supreme Court through the doctrine of
basic structure. Rule of law also implies a certain procedure anything out of the purview of
the relevant law is to be termed as ultra vires.

No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberties except according to procedure
established by law or of his property save by authority of law. The Law lies Supreme above
all, and the protection all have is that of equality before the law and equal protection of laws.
Any legal wrong committed by any person would be punished in a similar pattern. The law
adjudicated in the courts of law applies to all the people with equal force and bindingness.

Constitution makes the supreme law of the land and every law enacted should be in
conformity to it. Any violation makes the law ultra vires. In Menka Gandhi vs. Union of
India6 - The Supreme Court declared that Article 14 strikes against arbitrariness and further
enunciated in Indira Gandhi Nehru vs. Raj Narayan7 - where Article 329-A was held as
invalid, as it was passed to provide immunity to the Prime Minister’s office from judicial
review. The Supreme Court declared the same as invalid since it abridges the basic structure.

In the case of Amlan Jyoti Borooah Vs.State of Assam and Ors8. It was held by S B Sinha
that: “Equity must not be equated with compassion. Equitable principles must emanate from
facts which by themselves are unusual and peculiar. A balance has to be struck and the Court
must be cautious to ensure that its endeavour to do equity does not amount to judicial
benevolence or acquiescence of established violation of fundamental rights and the principles
of Rule of law.” In addition to this in P. Sambamurthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh9 the SC
has declared a provision authorizing the executive to interfere with tribunal justice as
unconstitutional characterizing it as “violative of the rule of law which is clearly a basic and
essential feature of the constitution.”

Henceforth, the concept of rule of law has been established beyond any doubt and conception
where the law in itself is supreme and any understanding, arbitrary or contrary to the law of
the land and the people’s liberty, is ultra vires of the law of the land, i.e. the Constitution and
the Constitutionalism. Hence the supremacy lies with the law, the law that rules all.

1994 SCC (1) 682, Gadakh Yashwantrao Kankarrao v. Balasaheb Vikhe Patil, the ratio laid do as If the
5

rule of law has to be preserved as the essence of the democracy of which purity of elections is a necessary
concomitant, it is the duty of the courts to appreciate the evidence and construe the law in a manner which
would subserve this higher purpose
6
1978 AIR 597
7
1975 AIR 1590
8
(2009) 3. SCC 227
9
1987 AIR 663