Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
An in-depth analysis of the concepts of Equality before Law and Equal Protection of Law as outlined in the Indian Constitution. It discusses the meaning of equality, the importance of these concepts, and how they are applied in Indian law. The document also explores the relationship between Equality before Law and the Rule of Law, as well as the exceptions to these principles. Students of law, particularly those focusing on constitutional law or Indian law, will find this document useful for understanding the fundamental principles of equality and non-discrimination in the Indian legal system.
What you will learn
Typology: Assignments
1 / 35
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Proper function of a Preamble is to explain certain facts which are necessary to be explained before the enactments contained in the Act can be understood.^1 Preamble is not an integral part of the Indian constitution was once decided upon by the Supreme Court of India in the BeruBari case; therefore it is not enforceable in a court of law. However, the Supreme Court of India has, in the Kesavananda case, recognised that the preamble may be used to interpret ambiguous areas of the constitution where differing interpretations present themselves. Supreme Court held that the Preamble is an integral part of the Constitution.
The preamble-page, along with other pages of the original Constitution of India, was designed and decorated solely by renowned painter Deodhar Rammanohar Sinha. As such, the page bears Deodhar Rammanohar Sinha's short signature Ram in Devanagari lower-right corner.
The preamble described the state as a "sovereign democratic republic". In 1976 the Forty- second Amendment explicitly enacted secular egalitarianism feature.
(^1) Adithya Singh, Preamble of Constitution of India and its significance.
Meaning (PREAMBLE):
A preamble is an introductory and explanatory statement in a document that explains the document's purpose and underlying philosophy. It is considered as the key to understand the constitution. When applied to the opening paragraphs of a law enacted by legislative body, it may recite historical facts pertinent to the subject of the statute. It is distinct from the long title or enacting formula of a law. The Preamble of our constitution is the introductory statement set out the guiding purpose and principal of the Constitution. It is based on the Objective Resolutions presented by Jawaharlal Nehru in the constituent assembly.
Chapter 1: Introduction
The Constitution of India guarantees the Right To Equality through Art 14 to 18.In the series of Constitutional provisions from Article 14 to 18, Art 14 is the most significant. Situations not covered by Art15 to 18, the general principle of Equality is embodied in Art14 is attracted whenever discrimination is alleged. The goal set out in our Constitution regarding status & opportunity is embodied in Art14 to Art18.Right to Equality has declared as Basic Feature of Indian Constitution by Supreme Court.
Chapter 2: Meaning of Equality:
The state or quality of being equal; correspondence in quantity, degree, value, rank, or ability
Equality basically means access or provision of equal opportunities, where individuals are protected from being discriminated against. Discrimination in equality can occur in race, sex, health, religion, family structure, age, politics, disability, culture, sexual orientation or in terms of believes.
The ideal of equality under Indian Constitution:
It has been seen that the Preamble to our constitution promises ‘equality of status and opportunity to all citizens and that this is the
(^6) M.G.Badappanavar v. State of Karnataka.
ideal of equality embraces both social and political equality. So far the ideal of social equality is concerned it is embodied in a series of Articles, of which Art.14 is the genus, and succeeding Arts. 15-18 contain particular application thereof. Our constitution is wedded to the concept of equality which is the basic feature of the constitution. Even a constitutional amendment which offends basic feature is declared as invalid. The state, its agencies and other local bodies being charged with public duty are bound to take action which must be in accordance with Art.14.The liability given to the state and its instrumentalities by the statute enacted under the constitution did not exempt them from honouring constitution itself and they continued to be ruled by Art.14.The equality clause under Art.14 of the constitution does not speak of mere formal equality before law but embodies the real concept of real and substantive equality, strikes at this inequalities^7. A more positive duty of the state is to minimise inequalities in the status, income and opportunities amongst individuals. Where unequals are competing, conditions must be created by relaxation or otherwise so that unequals compete in terms of equality with others in respect of jobs and employment of the state.
Chapter 3 : ARTICLE 14- Right to Equality
(A) ARTICLE 14 provides that the State shall not deny to any person equality before law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
(^7) Secretary, H.S.E.B. v. Suresh AIR 1999 SC 1160: (1999)3 SCC 601
1 Equality before the Law :
(a) “Equality before Law “only means that amongst the equals, the law should be equal and should be equally administered, and that the like should be treated alike.^10
(^9) Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. V. Union of India, (1996) 10 SCC 104 (para 15).
The “equality before the law” owes its origin to the English Common Law. The doctrine of equality is a dynamic and evolving concept.^11 It is embodied not only Arts. 15-18 as well as in Arts. 3, 39, 39 A, 41 and 46.It is a Negative concept because it implies the absence of any privilege in favour of any individual, and equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law^12. It means law should be equal and should equally administered, that is like should be treated alike. In short there shall not be discrimination. It is a declaration of equality of privilege in favour of every individual^13 .it means that no man above the Law of the land and that every person, whatever is his rank or status is subject to ordinary law of land. The concept of equality before law does not involve the idea of absolute equality amongst all, which may be a physical impossiblity.Art.14, guarantees the similarity of treatment and not identical treatment.
(b) Rule of Law: (Prof. A.V.DICEY)
Equality before law is co-relative to the concept of Rule of Law for all round evaluation of healthy social order.
I. Basic Feature of the Rule of Law is that ‘Justice should not only be done but it must also be seen to be done’.
(^1011) VENKATARAMAIYA’S LAW LEXICON-Volume 1 (Human Rights) 12 Indra Sawhney v. Union Of India, AIR 1993 SC 477DICEY, Law of the Constitution, 10 th (^) Ed. (1959) (^13) Amita v. Union of India.
and equally administered. The guarantee of equal protection applies against substantive as well as procedural laws.^15
b) Limitation of the Doctrine of Equal Protection: i. Every law cannot be made universally applicable. There are different class of persons who require special treatment.
ii. State has power to classify persons for legitimate purpose. Every classification is likely to produce some inequality and mere production of equality is no enough.^16
International Covenant: Article 26- All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of law. Article 26 of the
(^1516) Lachmandas v. State of Bombay, (1952) S.C.R. 710 (726) State of Bombay v. Balsara F.N.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966, not only uses both the expressions but also adds explanatory words, prohibiting discrimination.
Cook Islands & Western Samoa : Article 64(a) of Cook Islands and Article 15(1) of the Constitution of Western Samoa^17 combine the concept of equality and equal protection in the following words; “The right of the individual to equality before the law and to the protection of the law”
Japan: Article 14 of the Japanese Constitution, 1946 also combines the two concepts of legal equality and non-discrimination. Article 14 provides that “All of the people are equal under the and there shall be no discrimination in political, economic or social relations because of caste, creed, sex, social status, or family origin.”
(^17) Vermeulen v. A.G.,(1986) LCR (Cont.)786 (813)-W.Samoa
Object of Article 14:
The aim or the object of this Article to ensure that invidious distinction or arbitrary discrimination shall not be made by the state between a citizen and a citizen who answers the same description and the differences which may obtain between them are of no relevance for the purpose of applying a particular law reasonable classification is permissible. Article 14 provides that the state shall not deny to any person whether citizen or not, equality before the law and equal protection of law. It does not mean that same law must be applicable to all but the law should deal alike with all in one class; there shall be equality of treatment under Equal circumstances. So the object is that “equals should be treated unlike and unlike should not be treated alike. Likes should be treated alike. The object of Art. 14 is wider and is to ensure fairness and equality of treatment.
(A) Test Of Reasonable Classification :
If all men are treated equal and remained equal throughout their lives, then the same laws would apply to all of them. But we know that men are unequal.Euality does not mean that all men are protected by the same laws. It is here the Doctrine of classification steps in. All persons are not equal by nature or circumstances, the varying needs of different classes or sections of people require different treatment. This leads to classification among different groups of persons or class. For the purpose of this Article, even a single institution can form a class by itself and while deciding the question of violation of
Article 14, it is to be seen whether there are any reasonable basis on which a single or group of persons are left out of the group^19 .Though discrimination is prohibited, that cannot be applied to nullify a discrimination recognised by the Constitution itself.
Art.14 prohibits class legislation and not classification for purpose of legislation. A classification would be justified unless it is patently arbitrary. If there is any Reasonable basis for classification, the legislature would be entitled to make a different legislation. The legislature is competent to make classification. It is upon the legislature to identify the class of the people to be given protection and on what basis such protection is given. Court cannot interfere.^20 Art.14 does not require that the Legislative classification should be scientifically or logically perfect^21 .Classification for the purpose of legislation cannot be done with mathematical precision. The concept of equality permits rational or discriminating discrimination. Conformity of special benefits or rights or protection to a particular class of citizens is envisaged under Art.14 and is implicit in the concept of equality^22 .Art.14 proceeds on the premise that equality of treatment is required to be given to persons who are equally circumstanced. None should be favoured or should be placed under any disadvantage, in circumstances that do not admit of any reasonable justification for a different.
(^1920) Kshetriaya Kisan Gramin Bank v. D. B. Sharma, AIR 2001 SC 168: 21 D.C.Bhatia v. Union of India, (1995)1 S.C.C. 104.Ashutosh Gupta v. State of Rajasthan, (2002) 4 SCC 34. (^22) T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 8 SCC 481.
b. Basis of Classification:
(^24) Dhirendra v. Legal Remembrancer, (1955) 1 S.C.R. 224
c. Classification Authorised by the other provisions of the Constitution:
1. Any law making special provision for Women (or Children) under Article 15 (3) cannot be challenged on the ground of contravention of Art. 14^25. 2. Where the Constitution itself makes a classification, the charge of discrimination cannot be levelled against such separate treatment^26.
REASONABLENESS and FAIRNESS is the Heart and Soul of Article 14^27
Arbitrariness as a test under Art.14:
a) While the American interpretation of the ‘Equal protection of Law’ as well as earlier decision of our Supreme Court took the view that the test of violation of Art.14 was the absence of a reasonable classification, while under Art 19, a restriction was to be considered unreasonable if it was arbitrary or not founded on any rational principle, in recent cases, the Supreme Court appears to have mingled up the two concepts in broadening the sweep of Art. 14, thus setting up a dynamic concept of equality^28 .An arbitrary action may not be always be mala fide.
(^2526) Yusuf Abdul Aziz v. State of Bombay, 1954 SCR 930; AIR 1954 SC 321. 27 Sianik Motors (M/S) v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1961 SC 1480 (1486):1962 (1) SCR 517.Delhi Development Authority v. Joint Action Committee, Allottee of SFS Flats, (2008) 2 SCC 672 (para 43) (^28) Royappa E.P. v. State of T.N, AIR 1974 SC 555 (583); Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India.
