Skip to main content

Equality before law

 Article 14 of the Indian Constitution deal with the equality before law & equal protection of law inspired by 14th amendment in the Indian Constitution. The principle of article 14 is rule of law & natural justice in the Indian Constitution. Equality before law means that law is supreme in the country & equality among the citizen of the country. The idea of maintaining equality among all the citizens does not allow anyone to stand above the law. The concept of equality before law borrowed from the constitution of  United states of America. Article 14 of the Indian constitution stated that state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of law  within the territory of India. Equality before law is available to Indian citizens, legal person including corporation, foreign nationals excluding enemy aliens within the territory of India. The equal protection of law has certain exception in the state are President of India, Prime Minister, State Governor, Judges, Foreign Diplomats, etc, are not under the ambit of article 14 and considered as exception in the law who enjoys immunities, protections & special privileges. 

The principle of equality before law originates from the doctrine of Rule of Law by Professor Dicey. There are three implications of the doctrine of rule of law. Firstly there is supremacy of law which means no one is above law and absence of arbitrary law which is unfair to the citizen of a country. No one shall be punished except for the breach of law. Secondly, there shall be equality before law which implies equality among all the citizen and citizen have equal reach to the court of law. Thirdly, right of the individual shall be secured by the Constitution. 

in Secretary, Haryana State Electricity Board V. Suresh (1999) the court observed that it is not a literal interpretation of “equality before law” but a concept of real & substansive equality on the ground of social, economic difference that arises inequality in the society. The equality before law means there is no discrimination or favoritism and state shall secure the rights and privileges of the citizen in the country. In Chiranjitlal V. Union of India (1951) the court held that equal protection of law means right to be treated equally in similar circumstances both in the privileges conferred to the citizen as well as liabilities imposed by the law. 

Article 14 of the Indian Constitution may be suspended in the case of National emergency under article 359 of the Indian Constitution. During National emergency, President & Governor are immune from criminal & civil liabilities, which means they are not accountable to any court for the performance & exercise of the power & duties of the office. Certain members of the society are governed bt special rules in their profession i.e. lawyers, doctors, nurses, member of armed force & police. Such classes of people are treated differently from ordinary citizens. The rule of law does not prevent a certain class of person being subject to special rules. Member of parliament & state legislature are not liable with respect to anything done or said within the house. Foreign diplomats are immune from jurisdiction of courts in India. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more