Introduction

●​ The Constitution of India is the supreme law of the country, binding on all citizens.

Salient Features of the Indian Constitution

1.​ Lengthiest Constitution

○​ Contains 12 schedules and 448 articles.
○​ Inspired by various global constitutions.
○​ Based on the Government of India Act, 1935.
2.​ Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic
○​ Preamble ensures equality, justice, liberty, and fraternity.
3.​ Parliamentary Government
○​ Bicameral legislature for thorough deliberation on laws.
○​ Prime Minister holds real power; the President is the constitutional head.
4.​ Parliamentary vs. Presidential System
○​ Preferred parliamentary system for balanced power distribution.
○​ Presidential systems, like the U.S., separate executive and legislature.
5.​ Blend of Rigidity and Flexibility
○​ Amendments easier than the U.S. Constitution.
○​ 103 amendments made to date.
6.​ Fundamental Rights
○​ Six rights: equality, freedom, against exploitation, religious freedom,
cultural/educational rights, and constitutional remedies.
○​ Abolishes untouchability and ensures non-discrimination.
7.​ Directive Principles of State Policy
○​ Guidelines for creating a welfare state and ensuring social and economic
democracy.
8.​ Federation with Centralizing Tendency
○​ Strong central powers with a single constitution.
○​ Emergency provisions place states under central control.
9.​ Adult Suffrage
○​ Right to vote for citizens aged 18 and above (Article 326).
○​ Disqualifications include non-residence, unsound mind, and criminal offenses.
10.​Independent Judiciary
○​ Ensures constitutional enforcement.
○​ Secure tenure and independent appointments for judges.
11.​Secular State
○​ Equal respect for all religions (Preamble and Article 26).
○​ Proposal for a uniform civil code remains unimplemented.
12.​Single Citizenship
○​ Single citizenship for all Indians, ensuring equal rights nationwide.
13.​Fundamental Duties
 ○​ Listed in Article 51A, including respecting the Constitution, protecting heritage,
and promoting harmony.
14.​Judicial Review
○​ Judiciary ensures laws/actions comply with the Constitution.
○​ Articles 32, 136 (Supreme Court) and 226, 227 (High Court) provide judicial
review provisions.
○​ Reviews focus on illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety.

Preamble to the Constitution of India

1.​ Definition and Purpose

○​ The Preamble is an introductory statement outlining the philosophy, objectives,
and core values of the Constitution.
○​ Reflects the hopes, aspirations, and principles guiding the nation.
○​ Indicates the authority source and intentions of the framers.
2.​ Adoption and Effectiveness
○​ Drafted in 1947, adopted on 26 November 1949.
○​ Came into effect on 26 January 1950, celebrated as Republic Day.
3.​ Text of the Preamble
○​ WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, resolve to constitute India as a:
■​ Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic.
○​ To secure for all citizens:
■​ Justice – Social, economic, and political.
■​ Liberty – Of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship.
■​ Equality – Of status and opportunity.
■​ Fraternity – Assuring dignity of individuals and unity and integrity of the
nation.
○​ Adopted in the Constituent Assembly on 26 November 1949.

Provisions Relating to Citizenship in India

Constitutional Provisions

●​ Citizenship is under Union List and the jurisdiction of Parliament.

●​ Articles 5 to 11 in Part 2 of the Constitution deal with citizenship.
1.​ Article 5:
○​ Citizenship at the commencement of the Constitution.
○​ Granted to persons domiciled in India, born in India, or residing in India for over 5
years.
2.​ Article 6:
○​ Citizenship for persons migrating from Pakistan before July 19, 1949.
○​ Post this date, registration was required.
3.​ Article 7:
 ○​ Rights of citizenship for persons who migrated to Pakistan after March 1, 1947,
but returned with resettlement permits.
4.​ Article 8:
○​ Citizenship for Persons of Indian Origin (PIO) residing abroad if
parents/grandparents were born in India.
5.​ Article 9:
○​ Indian citizenship is terminated upon voluntary acquisition of foreign citizenship.
6.​ Article 10:
○​ Continuance of citizenship subject to laws by Parliament.
7.​ Article 11:
○​ Empowers Parliament to regulate acquisition and termination of citizenship.

Modes of Acquisition of Citizenship (Citizenship Act, 1955)

1.​ By Birth:
○​ Born in India between:
■​ 26.01.1950 – 01.07.1987: Citizenship granted regardless of parents'
nationality.
■​ 01.07.1987 – 02.12.2004: At least one parent must be an Indian citizen.
■​ On/after 03.12.2004: Both parents must be Indian citizens, or one must
be Indian and the other not an illegal migrant.
2.​ By Descent:
○​ Citizenship granted if:
■​ Born outside India after 26.01.1950 and parent(s) are Indian citizens by
birth.
■​ Birth registered with an Indian consulate within a year if born after
03.12.2004.
3.​ By Registration:
○​ Indian citizenship can be granted to:
■​ PIO residing in India for 7 years.
■​ PIO residing outside undivided India.
■​ Spouse of an Indian citizen (7 years of residence).
■​ Minor children of Indian citizens.
4.​ By Naturalisation:
○​ Residency of 12 years required (1 year before application + 11 cumulative
years).

Termination of Citizenship

●​ Voluntarily acquiring foreign citizenship.

●​ Illegal migrants cannot claim citizenship by registration or naturalisation.
Key Amendments to Citizenship Act

1.​ 1986:
○​ Introduced parent-based conditions for citizenship by birth.
2.​ 2003:
○​ Citizenship for those born after 04.12.2004 requires both parents to be Indian
citizens or one parent an Indian and the other not an illegal migrant.
3.​ 2019 (Citizenship Amendment Act):
○​ Allowed members of six communities (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis,
Christians) from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan to apply for citizenship if they
entered India before 31.12.2014.
○​ Reduced residency requirement from 11 years to 6 years.
○​ Exempted these migrants from the Passport Act and Foreigners Act.

Principles of Citizenship

●​ India adopts a mix of jus soli (birthright) and jus sanguinis (blood relation) principles.
●​ Dual citizenship or nationality is not permitted.

Article 14 – Right to Equality

Introduction

●​ Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
●​ Addresses socio-economic inequalities, ensuring no discrimination based on gender,
religion, caste, etc.
●​ Embodies the principle of treating like cases alike and forbids special privileges based
on rank or status.

Key Concepts

1.​ Equality Before Law:​

○​ Negative concept; the State must abstain from discriminatory actions.

○​ No individual is above the law (lex loci).
2.​ Equal Protection of Laws:​

○​ Positive concept; the State must ensure equal treatment for all and take
measures to bridge inequalities.
○​ Treats unlike cases differently when justified.

Exceptions
 ●​ Immunity for Parliament/State Legislature members (Articles 105 & 194) for
statements in the House.
●​ Suspension of rights during an Emergency (Article 359).
●​ Immunity for the President and Governors for official acts (Article 361).

Reasonable Classification

●​ Allows classification if it serves a legitimate objective and is rationally connected to it.

●​ Air India v. Nargesh Meerza Case: Termination due to pregnancy deemed
unreasonable and a violation of Article 14.

Article 15 – Prohibition of Discrimination

1.​ Article 15(1): Prohibits discrimination by the State based on religion, race, caste, sex,
place of birth, or any combination.​

○​ DP Joshi Case: Differentiation based on residence, not place of birth, upheld.

2.​ Article 15(2): Prohibits discrimination in access to public places and facilities.​

○​ Nainsukhdas Case: Electoral boards based on religion declared

unconstitutional.
3.​ Article 15(3): Permits special provisions for women and children.​

4.​ Article 15(4): Added by the First Amendment, allows reservations for:​

○​ Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs).

○​ Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs).
○​ MR Balaji Case: Excessive reservations without reasonable classification
deemed invalid.
5.​ Article 15(5): Enables reservations in educational institutions (except minority
institutions) for SEBCs, SCs, and STs.​

○​ Indira Sawhney Case: Introduced the "creamy layer" concept; reservations

capped at 50%.
6.​ Article 15(6): Added via the 103rd Amendment (2019), provides for:​

○​ 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in educational

institutions.
○​ Independent of existing reservation caps.

Article 16 – Right to Equality of Opportunity in Public Employment

 1.​ Equal Opportunity:​

○​ Article 16(1): Ensures equal opportunity for all citizens in public sector
employment or appointment under the State.
○​ The State can set qualifications for recruitment but must ensure equal access to
applications.
2.​ Non-Discrimination:​

○​ Article 16(2): Prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex,

descent, birthplace, or residence in public employment.
3.​ Residence-Based Conditions:​

○​ Article 16(3): Parliament can prescribe residence requirements for employment

under a State or Union Territory.
4.​ Reservation for Backward Classes:​

○​ Article 16(4): Allows reservation in public services for socially and educationally
backward classes.
○​ The State determines criteria for identifying backward classes.
5.​ Indira Sawhney Case (1992):​

○​ Mandated separate reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in central

government jobs.
○​ Excluded the "creamy layer" of OBCs and set a 50% upper limit for total
reservations.
6.​ Disabled Candidates:​

○​ Equal rights and opportunities for disabled citizens with certified disabilities (40%
or more).
○​ Reservations provided under Articles 15(1) and 15(2) for government services
and institutions.
7.​ National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC):​

○​ Created following the Indira Sawhney Case to manage backward class

reservations.
○​ 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018): Granted constitutional status to
NCBC.
○​ Functions: Examine complaints, monitor welfare measures, and safeguard the
interests of backward classes.

Summary of Key Points:

Abolition of Untouchability (Article 17):

 ●​ Abolition and Legal Prohibition: Untouchability is abolished and punishable under the
Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1976 (formerly the Untouchability Offences Act,
1955). Public spaces must be open to all citizens.
●​ Judicial Interpretation: The Constitution does not define "untouchability," but courts
have broadened its scope.
●​ Case Example: Asiad Project Workers Case:
○​ Violation of Article 17 & 23: Workers from lower castes were treated as
untouchables and denied wages.
○​ Child Labor Violation: Employment of children under 14 (violating Article 24).
○​ Poor Living Conditions: Breach of Article 21 (Right to Life).

Abolition of Titles (Article 18):

●​ Prohibition of Titles: The State cannot confer titles except military and academic
distinctions.
●​ National Awards: Titles like Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards do not violate Article
18.
●​ Key Case: BalajiRaghavan v. Union of India (1996):
○​ National awards are not "titles" under Article 18.
○​ The Supreme Court emphasized the need for proper criteria in award selection.

Fundamental Freedoms (Article 19):

●​ Guarantees six freedoms to citizens with reasonable restrictions under specific

circumstances.

Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19(1)(a)):

●​ Essential for democracy and individual personality development.

●​ Key Cases:
○​ Emmanuel v. State of Kerala: Expulsion of students for not singing the national
anthem violated their rights under Articles 19 and 25.
○​ Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India: Restriction on advertisements
violated freedom of the press.
○​ Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India: Customs duty on newsprint was
struck down as it interfered with Article 19(1)(a).

Freedom of Assembly (Article 19(1)(b)):

●​ Citizens can assemble peaceably without arms, subject to reasonable restrictions.

●​ Kameshwar Prasad v. State of Bihar: Government employees retain their right to
peaceful demonstrations.
Freedom of Association (Article 19(1)(c)):

●​ Right to form associations or unions but excludes rights to recognition or to strike.

●​ O.K. Ghosh v. E.X. Joseph: Restrictions on government employees’ union activities
were deemed unconstitutional.

Freedom to Move Freely (Article 19(1)(d)):

●​ Right to move within Indian territory, with restrictions for public interest or Scheduled
Tribes' protection.

Freedom to Reside and Settle (Article 19(1)(e)):

●​ Citizens can reside anywhere, subject to restrictions for public or Scheduled Tribes’
interests.

Freedom to Practice Any Profession (Article 19(1)(g)):

●​ Citizens can engage in any lawful profession or business. Restrictions can be imposed
under Article 19(6) for public welfare.

Restrictions on Fundamental Freedoms (Clause (2) of Article 19):

Laws can impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of:

●​ Sovereignty and Integrity of India.

●​ Security of the State.
●​ Friendly relations with foreign states.
●​ Public order, decency, morality, or contempt of court.
●​ Prevention of defamation or incitement to offense.

Article 20: Protection in Respect of Conviction for Offences

Article 20 is a fundamental provision of the Indian Constitution that remains effective even
during emergencies. It includes three key protections:

1. Ex Post Facto Law (Article 20(1))

●​ Bars retrospective application of criminal laws for new offences.

●​ Prevents penalizing an individual for actions that were not offences at the time they were
committed.
●​ Ensures justice, equity, reasonableness, and prevents arbitrary legislation.
●​ Key Judgments:
 ○​ Kedar Nath v. State of West Bengal: Criminal laws are prospective and cannot
apply retrospectively.
○​ Rattan Lal v. State of Punjab: Allowed retrospective implementation for
reducing punishments.

2. Doctrine of Double Jeopardy (Article 20(2))

●​ Protects individuals from being prosecuted and punished more than once for the same
offence.
●​ Applies only to judicial punishments, not quasi-judicial proceedings.
●​ Key Judgments:
○​ Venkataraman v. Union of India: Applicable only to judicial proceedings.
○​ Maqbool Hussain v. State of Bombay: Confiscation of gold by customs did not
amount to judicial punishment.

3. Self-Incrimination (Article 20(3))

●​ Prohibits compelling an accused to give evidence against themselves.

●​ Protection applies to personal knowledge and all stages of proceedings.
●​ Voluntary disclosure by the accused is not protected.
●​ Key Judgments:
○​ M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra: Protection applies to both accused and
suspects, but not to voluntary disclosures.
●​ Witnesses are protected under Section 132 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, not
Article 20(3).

This summary encapsulates the essential aspects and landmark cases of Article 20.

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. It
states that no person can be deprived of these rights except according to a procedure
established by law.

Key points of Article 21:

●​ Right to life is interpreted broadly to include right to live with dignity, right to
health, right to pollution-free air, etc.
 ●​ Right against sexual harassment at workplace is included in the right to life with
dignity.
●​ Right to work is not a fundamental right under Article 21.
●​ Right to social security and protection of family is included in the right to life.
●​ Right to health and medical care is included in the right to life.
●​ Right to die is not included in the right to life. Euthanasia, however, may fall
under right to live with dignity in certain cases.
●​ Right to get pollution-free water and air is included in the right to life.
●​ Right to privacy is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but has been
recognized as a fundamental right by the Supreme Court.

Landmark Supreme Court cases related to Article 21:

●​ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) - Expanded the scope of right to life.
●​ State of Punjab v. M.S. Chawla (1997) - Right to health is included in right to life.
●​ Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996) - Right to die is not included in right to life,
but euthanasia may be permissible under certain circumstances.
●​ M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988) - Right to clean environment is included in
right to life.
●​ Re: Noise Pollution (2005) - Right to freedom from noise pollution is included in
right to life.
●​ RP Ltd. v. Proprietors Indian Express Newspapers, Bombay Pvt. Ltd. (1988) -
Right to know is included in right to life.
●​ PUCL v. Union of India (1997) - Telephone tapping is permissible only under a
just and fair procedure.
●​ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) - Right to travel abroad is part of right to
personal liberty.
●​ Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1994) - Guidelines laid down to
prevent illegal detention.
 ●​ DK. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) - Detailed guidelines laid down to
prevent torture and cruel treatment during arrest and detention.
●​ M.H. Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra (1978) - Right to free legal aid and right to
appeal are included in right to fair trial.
●​ Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1979) - Right to speedy
trial is included in right to life.
●​ Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978) - Right against solitary confinement.
●​ Deena v. Union of India (1982) - Death by hanging is not violative of Article 21.
●​ T.V. Vatheeswaram v. State of Tamil Nadu (1983) - Delay in execution of death
sentence beyond 2 years may violate Article 21.
●​ Murli S. Deora v. Union of India (2002) - Right to smoke in public places can be
restricted to protect the right to life of non-smokers. ░

Safeguards Against Arbitrary Arrest and Detention: Article 22

1.​ Introduction to Article 22:​

○​ Article 22 is part of fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution and

safeguards individuals from arbitrary arrest and detention.
○​ It covers two main aspects:
■​ Protection against arbitrary arrest (punitive detention) where the person is
charged with a crime.
■​ Safeguards against preventive detention, where a person is detained
without being charged, based on a reasonable suspicion of future
wrongdoing.
2.​ Article 22: Not a Complete Code:​

○​ A K Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): The Supreme Court viewed Article 22

narrowly, saying that detention under law could not be challenged even if it
violated other rights.
○​ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India: The scope of 'personal liberty' was
broadened, connecting Article 19 and 21, meaning any law limiting personal
liberty must pass both articles' tests.
3.​ Rights of Arrested Persons:​

○​ Right to Information: As per Section 50 of CrPC and Article 22(1), anyone

arrested must be informed of the grounds of arrest immediately.
 ○​ Right to Legal Representation: Article 22(1) guarantees the right to consult and
be defended by a lawyer of one’s choice.
○​ Right to Speedy Trial: Interpreted by the Supreme Court in Hussainara
Khatoon v. Home Secretary, Bihar, to prevent long detentions without trial, and
to ensure free legal aid under Article 39(A) of the Constitution.
○​ Right to Be Produced Before Magistrate: Article 22(2) ensures an arrested
person must be brought before a magistrate within 24 hours (excluding travel
time) for detention authorization.
4.​ Exceptions to Rights Under Article 22:​

○​ Preventive Detention: Article 22(3) excludes certain rights for those detained
under preventive detention laws, especially when dealing with 'enemy aliens' or
persons detained for state security purposes.
○​ Preventive Detention Laws: These laws allow detention without charge,
primarily aimed at preventing future threats to national security or public order.
Such detention can occur even during peacetime, unlike other democratic
nations.
5.​ Preventive Detention Laws:​

○​ Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA): Allowed

detention without trial for up to a year and other controversial provisions. It was
repealed after being abused.
○​ National Security Act (NSA): Allowed detention for up to 12 months without
charge, often criticized for misuse.
○​ Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA): Repealed after allegations of abuse.
6.​ Constitutional Safeguards:​

○​ Advisory Board Review: Preventive detention cannot exceed 3 months without

review by an Advisory Board, consisting of members equivalent to high court
judges.
○​ Communication of Grounds: Article 22(5) mandates that the grounds for
detention must be communicated to the detainee, except in cases where it is
deemed against public interest.
○​ Right to Representation: The detainee has the right to make a representation
against the detention.
7.​ COFEPOSA and Article 22(5):​

○​ COFEPOSA (1974): The law allowed detention on suspicion of involvement in

smuggling. Clause 5 of Article 22 applies, ensuring timely communication of
grounds and protection against wrongful detention.
8.​ Issues and Criticisms:​

○​ Delay in Representation: No time limit is prescribed for the disposal of

representations, which can lead to prolonged and unjust detentions.
 ○​ Clause 6: Allows non-disclosure of certain facts to protect public interest but can
be seen as arbitrary without clear justification.

Conclusion: Article 22 provides fundamental safeguards but is often criticized for allowing
broad preventive detention powers that can be abused. Its exceptions and lack of detailed
procedures leave room for potential misuse.

Safeguards Against Arbitrary Arrest and Detention: Article 22

1.​ Introduction to Article 22:​

○​ Article 22 is part of fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution and

safeguards individuals from arbitrary arrest and detention.
○​ It covers two main aspects:
■​ Protection against arbitrary arrest (punitive detention) where the person is
charged with a crime.
■​ Safeguards against preventive detention, where a person is detained
without being charged, based on a reasonable suspicion of future
wrongdoing.
2.​ Article 22: Not a Complete Code:​

○​ A K Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): The Supreme Court viewed Article 22

narrowly, saying that detention under law could not be challenged even if it
violated other rights.
○​ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India: The scope of 'personal liberty' was
broadened, connecting Article 19 and 21, meaning any law limiting personal
liberty must pass both articles' tests.
3.​ Rights of Arrested Persons:​

○​ Right to Information: As per Section 50 of CrPC and Article 22(1), anyone

arrested must be informed of the grounds of arrest immediately.
○​ Right to Legal Representation: Article 22(1) guarantees the right to consult and
be defended by a lawyer of one’s choice.
○​ Right to Speedy Trial: Interpreted by the Supreme Court in Hussainara
Khatoon v. Home Secretary, Bihar, to prevent long detentions without trial, and
to ensure free legal aid under Article 39(A) of the Constitution.
○​ Right to Be Produced Before Magistrate: Article 22(2) ensures an arrested
person must be brought before a magistrate within 24 hours (excluding travel
time) for detention authorization.
4.​ Exceptions to Rights Under Article 22:​

○​ Preventive Detention: Article 22(3) excludes certain rights for those detained
under preventive detention laws, especially when dealing with 'enemy aliens' or
persons detained for state security purposes.
 ○​ Preventive Detention Laws: These laws allow detention without charge,
primarily aimed at preventing future threats to national security or public order.
Such detention can occur even during peacetime, unlike other democratic
nations.
5.​ Preventive Detention Laws:​

○​ Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA): Allowed

detention without trial for up to a year and other controversial provisions. It was
repealed after being abused.
○​ National Security Act (NSA): Allowed detention for up to 12 months without
charge, often criticized for misuse.
○​ Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA): Repealed after allegations of abuse.
6.​ Constitutional Safeguards:​

○​ Advisory Board Review: Preventive detention cannot exceed 3 months without

review by an Advisory Board, consisting of members equivalent to high court
judges.
○​ Communication of Grounds: Article 22(5) mandates that the grounds for
detention must be communicated to the detainee, except in cases where it is
deemed against public interest.
○​ Right to Representation: The detainee has the right to make a representation
against the detention.
7.​ COFEPOSA and Article 22(5):​

○​ COFEPOSA (1974): The law allowed detention on suspicion of involvement in

smuggling. Clause 5 of Article 22 applies, ensuring timely communication of
grounds and protection against wrongful detention.
8.​ Issues and Criticisms:​

○​ Delay in Representation: No time limit is prescribed for the disposal of

representations, which can lead to prolonged and unjust detentions.
○​ Clause 6: Allows non-disclosure of certain facts to protect public interest but can
be seen as arbitrary without clear justification.

Conclusion: Article 22 provides fundamental safeguards but is often criticized for allowing
broad preventive detention powers that can be abused. Its exceptions and lack of detailed
procedures leave room for potential misuse.

Article 23 and 24 – Right Against Exploitation

1.​ Purpose: Articles 23 and 24 provide fundamental rights to protect against exploitation,
such as trafficking, forced labour, child labour, and other forms of inhumane treatment.​

2.​ Article 23 - Prohibition of Trafficking and Forced Labour:​

 ○​ Prohibited Acts:
■​ Trafficking – The sale and purchase of human beings for exploitation.
■​ Begar – Forced work without pay.
■​ Forced Labour – Any work or services imposed against a person's will.
○​ Laws Enacted:
■​ Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956
■​ Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976
○​ Exceptions: Forced labour may be permitted for public purposes (e.g., national
defence, public services like water and electricity), but must not discriminate
based on religion, race, caste, or class.
3.​ Human Trafficking:​

○​ Involves the sale of humans, primarily for sexual slavery, forced prostitution, or
forced labour.
○​ Slavery is not directly mentioned in Article 23 but falls under the prohibition of
trafficking.
4.​ Begar and Forced Labour:​

○​ Begar: Forcing someone to work without remuneration.

○​ Forced Labour: Even paying less than the minimum wage or compelling work
due to debt qualifies as forced labour.
○​ Bonded Labour: Forced work to repay debts, which is unconstitutional.
5.​ Important Judgments on Article 23:​

○​ People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1983): The Supreme
Court expanded the scope of Article 23, stating that any form of forced labour,
even if under contract, is prohibited. It also includes economic pressure, such as
low wages, that forces people to work against their will.
○​ Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984): The court addressed the
issue of bonded labour, directing the state to identify, release, and rehabilitate
bonded workers.
6.​ Article 24 - Prohibition of Child Labour:​

○​ Purpose: Prohibits the employment of children under 14 years in hazardous

work like factories and mines.
○​ Supreme Court Rulings:
■​ People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982): The
court ruled that construction work is hazardous and should not involve
children under 14.
■​ MC Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu: The court addressed child labour in
cracker factories and directed compensation for affected children and the
creation of a welfare fund.
In summary, Articles 23 and 24 aim to protect individuals, particularly vulnerable groups like
children and the economically disadvantaged, from exploitation in various forms, backed by
laws and judicial interpretations to ensure their rights are upheld.

Articles 25-28: Right to Religion

Overview:​
The Constitution of India ensures the right to freedom of religion through Articles 25 to 28,
allowing individuals to practice, profess, and propagate their religion freely. This is part of India's
secular model, where the state doesn’t favor any particular religion.

Key Articles Related to Freedom of Religion:

1.​ Article 25: Freedom of Religion

○​ Guarantees the right to:
■​ Freedom of conscience (freedom to believe).
■​ Practice and propagate religion freely.
○​ Restrictions are allowed for:
■​ Regulating religious practices linked to economic, political, or secular
activities.
■​ Social welfare and reforms.
■​ Ensuring Hindu religious institutions are open to all castes.
2.​ Article 26: Freedom to Manage Religious Affairs
○​ Religious denominations have the right to:
■​ Establish and maintain religious and charitable institutions.
■​ Manage their religious affairs.
■​ Own and acquire property (both movable and immovable).
3.​ Article 27: Freedom from Religion-Based Taxes
○​ No person can be forced to pay taxes that promote any specific religion.
4.​ Article 28: Freedom from Religious Instruction in Schools
○​ Freedom to not attend religious instruction or worship in certain educational
institutions, unless it's voluntary.

Important Case Studies:

1.​ The National Anthem Case (Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala)

○​ Three children refused to sing the national anthem due to their religious belief.
○​ The Supreme Court ruled this violated their freedom of religion under Article 25,
as they respected the anthem but didn’t sing it.
2.​ Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India
 ○​ The Supreme Court ruled that people must show respect to the national
anthem, but it’s optional to sing it in cinemas. Disabled people are exempt.
3.​ Appointment of Non-Brahmins as Priests (N. Aditya v. Travancore Devaswom
Board)
○​ Supreme Court ruling: A non-Brahmin can be appointed as a priest if qualified,
highlighting that caste is not a barrier to religious roles.
4.​ Acquisition of Religious Places by the State (M Ismail Faruqi v. Union of India)
○​ The Supreme Court ruled that a mosque is not essential for Islam and prayers
can be offered anywhere, so the state can acquire religious places, but not those
essential for religious practice.
5.​ Noise Pollution and Religion (Church of God v. K.K.R. Majestic Colony)
○​ The court ruled that religious practices like prayers should not disturb public
peace, restricting the use of loudspeakers and drums after 10 pm.
6.​ Shifting Religious Property (Gulam Abbas v. State of UP)
○​ The Supreme Court allowed shifting graves to resolve conflicts between Shia
and Sunni Muslims, stating that the right to practice religion is not absolute and
can be restricted for public order.

Limitations of the Right to Religion

1.​ Article 26: Right to Religion - Limitations​

○​ The right to religion under Article 26 is not absolute.

○​ Religious practices cannot violate public order, morality, or health.
○​ If a practice contravenes these, it cannot claim protection under the
Constitution.
2.​ Article 27: Freedom from Religion-based Taxes​

○​ Prevents the state from compelling individuals to pay taxes for promoting or
maintaining any specific religion.
○​ Case Example: In Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras v. Sri
LakshmindraThirthaSwamiar, the Supreme Court ruled that a contribution levied
by the state for the administration of religious institutions is not a tax but a fee for
proper management.
3.​ Article 28: Prohibition of Religious Instruction in State-Aided Institutions​

○​ Prohibits religious instruction in educational institutions funded fully by the

state.
○​ Exceptions: If the institution is administered by a religious trust or endowment
requiring religious instruction, it is allowed.
○​ Students are not required to take part in religious activities or instruction in
state-funded institutions.
4.​ Teaching of Guru Nanak - Case Example​
 ○​ In D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab, the court held that studying the life and
teachings of Guru Nanak at Guru Nanak University (fully funded by the state)
does not constitute religious instruction and does not violate Article 28.

Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30)

1.​ Article 29: Right to Preserve Language, Script, and Culture​

○​ Guarantees the right of any group of citizens to preserve their language,

script, or culture.
○​ Conditions to claim this right:
■​ The group must be citizens of India.
■​ The group must be distinct in terms of language, script, or culture.
2.​ Article 29(2) - Non-discrimination in Admission​

○​ Prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, or language in

educational institutions.
○​ Exceptions: Denial of admission can happen on other grounds like domicile,
sex, or state need.
3.​ Article 30: Right of Minorities to Establish and Administer Educational Institutions​

○​ Religious and linguistic minorities have the right to establish and administer
educational institutions of their choice.
○​ Article 30(1A): If the state acquires property from a minority institution, it must
ensure that compensation does not restrict the minority’s rights.
4.​ Difference between Articles 29(1) and 30(1)​

○​ Article 29(1) applies to all citizens (including the majority) and protects cultural
and educational rights.
○​ Article 30(1) specifically protects the rights of religious and linguistic
minorities to establish and manage educational institutions.
○​ Article 30 does not require citizenship as a condition, while Article 29 applies
only to Indian citizens.
5.​ TMA Pai Foundation Case​

○​ Minorities have the right to establish and administer educational institutions,

even if they receive state aid.
○​ The state can regulate academic standards, but not admissions or fees in
minority institutions.
○​ States can set quotas for minority students but must balance these with the
educational needs of the minority and non-minority citizens.
 ○​ Admission procedures must be fair and transparent, and merit should be a
primary factor in professional education.

Article 32 - Right to Constitutional Remedies

●​ Purpose: Article 32 gives individuals the right to approach the Supreme Court for
justice if their fundamental rights are violated.
●​ Scope: The Supreme Court can issue orders or directions to enforce fundamental rights.
●​ Direct Access: Citizens can approach the Supreme Court directly, bypassing lower
courts.
●​ Limitations: Parliament can assign other courts to exercise the Supreme Court’s power,
but constitutional amendments cannot suspend this right.

Types of Writs Under Article 32

1.​ Habeas Corpus​

○​ Meaning: "You have the body."

○​ Purpose: Protects against unlawful detention.
○​ Usage: If an individual is wrongfully imprisoned or tortured, they can seek relief
through this writ.
○​ Example: In ADM Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla, the Supreme Court held that
Habeas Corpus cannot be suspended even during an emergency.
2.​ Quo Warranto​

○​ Meaning: "By what authority."

○​ Purpose: Ensures that no one holds a public office without legal entitlement.
○​ Usage: Can challenge the legality of someone occupying a public position, such
as a government officer or Chief Minister.
3.​ Mandamus​

○​ Meaning: "We command."

○​ Purpose: Orders a lower court or government official to perform a legal duty that
they are failing to do.
○​ Conditions: Must be a public duty, and the applicant must have a legal right to
compel action.
○​ Exceptions: Cannot be issued against the President or Governor.
4.​ Certiorari​

○​ Meaning: "To be certified."

○​ Purpose: To correct the wrongful exercise of jurisdiction by a lower court or
authority.
 ○​ Conditions: Issued if there is a jurisdictional error, violation of natural justice,
or error on the face of the record.
5.​ Prohibition​

○​ Purpose: Prevents a lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting

unlawfully.
○​ Usage: Issued before a lower court makes a decision, typically to stop illegal
actions.

Amendments to Article 32

●​ 42nd Amendment (Emergency): Reduced the scope of judicial review during the
emergency, limiting Article 32.
●​ 43rd Amendment: Repealed Article 32A, restoring the Supreme Court’s power to
review state laws.

Limitations of Article 32

●​ Article 33: Allows Parliament to limit fundamental rights for armed forces.
●​ Article 34: Provides indemnity for actions during Martial Law.
●​ Article 352: Suspends fundamental rights during a National Emergency.
●​ Article 359: Gives the President power to suspend Article 32 during emergencies, but
Parliament can disapprove it.

Right to Information Act, 2005

●​ Purpose: Provides citizens the right to access information from public authorities to
promote transparency and accountability.
●​ Enactment: The RTI Act was enacted in 2005 based on the 77th report of the
Parliamentary Standing Committee.
●​ Importance: Promotes accountability, democracy, and participatory government by
allowing citizens to access government information.

Right to Information Act, 2005 – Key Points

1.​ Definition of Right to Information:​

○​ The right to access information under the control of public authorities.

○​ Applies to information held by public authorities as defined in Section 2(h).
2.​ Public Authorities:​

○​ Defined as any body established by the Constitution, law, or notification issued by

the government.
○​ Includes bodies owned, controlled, or substantially financed by the government.
3.​ Public Information Officers (PIO):​

○​ Public authorities must appoint PIOs to handle information requests.

○​ PIOs must process requests within the prescribed time (Sections 6 & 7).
4.​ Exemptions from Disclosure (Section 8):​
Information can be withheld if it:​

○​ Affects national security or sovereignty.

○​ Is forbidden by court order.
○​ Breaches parliamentary privilege.
○​ Involves trade secrets or confidential commercial information.
○​ Poses a risk to someone's safety.
○​ Is personal and irrelevant to public interest.
5.​ Discretionary Disclosure:​

○​ Public authorities can disclose exempt information if public interest outweighs the
harm.
6.​ Third-Party Information:​

○​ If the information involves a third party, they must be notified, especially for
commercial secrets.
7.​ Central & State Information Commissions:​

○​ Each has a Chief Information Commissioner and assistants appointed by the

President/Governor.
○​ They handle complaints about access to information and have the powers of a
civil court.
8.​ Powers of Information Commissions (Section 18):​

○​ Can summon individuals, demand documents, and issue witness summons.

○​ Can examine public records and enforce compliance.
9.​ Appeals Process (Section 19):​

○​ First Appeal: If the information is not received or is unsatisfactory, the applicant

can appeal to a senior officer within 30 days.
○​ Second Appeal: If the first appeal fails, the case can be taken to the Central or
State Information Commission within 90 days.
10.​Burden of Proof:​
 ○​ The PIO must justify the denial of information in an appeal.
11.​Penalties (Section 20):​

○​ PIOs can face a penalty of Rs. 250/day (up to Rs. 25,000) for:
■​ Not accepting an information request.
■​ Delaying information without reasonable cause.
■​ Giving incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information.
■​ Destroying requested information.
○​ PIOs may also face disciplinary action.
12.​Disciplinary Actions:​

○​ The Information Commission can recommend disciplinary action against erring

PIOs.

This Act promotes transparency and accountability in government by ensuring that citizens have
access to information under public authority control, with clear rules and penalties for
non-compliance.