Skip to main content

Fundamental Rights and Duties

Fundamental Rights and Duties


To ensure the overall development of citizen, the Fundamental Rights have been provided in the part III (Article 12-35) of the Constitution.

According to Article 13 of the Constitution, the Fundamental Rights cannot be modified or limited in any way except by the procedure of Constitutional Amendment.

The Fundamental Right are justiciable, i.e., they are protected by the judiciary in case of their violation. The Fundamental Rights are not unlimited or absolute.

The “State” can impose reasonable restrictions on their operation.

For the purpose of part III, the “State” means Central government, provincial government, and local authorities under the government (Article 120).


The individuals can directly approach the Supreme Court or High Court for the protection of their Fundamental Rights. Under the Right to Constitutional Remedies, both Supreme Court and High Court can issue writs of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Quo-warranto, Prohibition and Certiorari.

The Right to Constitutional Remedy has been described by Dr. Ambedkar as the soul of the Constitution .

Seven Fundamental Rights were provided in the original Constitution. But the right to property has been replaced as Fundamental Right and has been covered into an ordinary legal right under Article 300 by the 44th Amendment in 1978. Consequently, at present, there are only six Fundamental Rights.


The Six Fundamental Rights are: Right to Equality, Right to Freedom, Right against Exploitation, Right to Religious Freedom, Cultural and Educational Rights and Right to Constitutional Remedies.


Right to freedom contains six freedom.

Fundamental Rights are generally suspended during operations of National Emergency. Right to Freedom under Article 19 is automatically suspended. Other rights may be suspended by a declaration of the President to the effect.

But rights to life and personal liberty under Article 20 and 21 cannot be suspended even during National Emergency.

 Fundamental duties were not provided in the original Constitution.

Ten Fundamental Duties were added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976 in Article 51a of part IVA along with Directive Principles of State Policies.


Like Directive Principles of State Policy, The Fundamental Duties are also non justiciable. However, they can be enforced by the government through enactment of laws by appropriate Legislatures.


  1. Right to Equality


 Equality before the law and equal protection of law (Article 14).


 Prohibition of discrimination on Grounds of religion etc. (Article 15)


Equality of opportunity regarding employment (Article 16)


Abolition of untouchability (Article 17)


  1. Right to Freedom


 Freedom of speech and expression, assembly, movement, residence and settlement, profession (Articles 19).


Protection is respect of conviction for offences (Article 20).


Protect to life and liberty (Article 21).


Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases (Article 22)


  1.  Right against Exploitation


Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour (Article 23).


Prohibition  of employment of children in hazardous employment (Article 24).


  1. Right to Freedom of Religion 


Freedom of conscience and free profession (Article 25) 


Freedom to manage religious affairs (Article 26)


Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion (Article 27) 


  1. Cultural and Educational Rights


Protection of language, script and culture of minorities (Article 29).


Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions (Article 30).


  1. Right to Constitutional Remedies


 Remedies for enforcement of the Fundamental Rights conferred by this part: writs of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari and Quo-warranto (Article 32).

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