Jayalakshmi K. has completed her B.Sc. Computer science and graduated with an LLB from Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University in Chennai, Read More
Abstract
Fundamental Rights, enshrined in Part III of the Indian Constitution (Articles 12-35), serve as the foundation of individual liberties and democratic principles in India. These rights aim to safeguard citizens’ freedoms, promote equality, and prevent the abuse of power by the state. Historically, the inclusion of Fundamental Rights was influenced by global human rights movements, with the framers of the Constitution ensuring a robust legal framework for their protection. Landmark case laws, such as Kesavananda Bharati, Navtej Singh Johar and Puttaswamy v. Union of India, have significantly shaped the interpretation and enforcement of these rights, establishing precedents for future legal protections. These rights are classified into various categories, including the Right to Equality, Right to Freedom, and Right to Religious Freedom. A comparison with international legal frameworks highlights both the strengths and limitations of India’s approach. However, challenges remain, particularly regarding the Justifiability, scope of restrictions, and the suspension of rights during a national emergency. Despite these challenges, Fundamental Rights remain essential for upholding the democratic fabric of India, ensuring justice, and protecting vulnerable population.
Introduction
Fundamental Rights form the bedrock of the Indian Constitution, safeguarding personal freedoms and upholding the values of democracy, equality, and justice. Contained in Part[1] III (Articles 12 to 35), these rights assure essential civil liberties to every citizen, protect against misuse of state power, and strive to establish social equity.
Classification
Fundamental Rights outlined in Articles 14 to 35[2] of the Indian Constitution are grouped into the following categories:
- Right to Equality (Articles 14–18)
This right ensures equal treatment before the law and prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. It also guarantees equal opportunities in public employment.
- Right to Freedom (Articles 19–22)
It encompasses several freedoms including speech and expression, peaceful assembly, forming associations or unions, moving freely across the country, residing anywhere in India, and practicing any occupation or profession. Notably, Articles 20 and 21 remain in force even during a National Emergency. These rights align with international human rights standards such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
- Right Against Exploitation (Articles 23–24)
This set of rights prohibits human trafficking, forced labour, and child labour, aiming to eliminate all forms of exploitation.
- Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28)
It guarantees the freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practice, and propagate any religion of one’s choice.
- Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29–30)
These rights protect the interests of cultural, linguistic, and religious minorities by allowing them to preserve their heritage and establish educational institutions of their preference.
- Right to Constitutional Remedies (Articles 32–35)
This right empowers individuals to approach the courts for enforcement of their Fundamental Rights, acting as a safeguard against their violation.
Significance
Constitutional Protection
Fundamental Rights hold a special status[3] as they are enshrined in the Constitution, distinguishing them from ordinary legal rights. Some of these rights are exclusively available to Indian citizens, while others extend to all individuals, including foreigners and entities such as corporations.
Not Absolute
These rights are neither absolute nor immutable. Parliament retains the authority to amend or restrict them, but only through a constitutional amendment. They are subject to reasonable limitations, and it is the judiciary that determines the validity and reasonableness of such restrictions.
Justifiability
Fundamental Rights are enforceable by law, allowing any individual to approach the judiciary if these rights are infringed. In fact, any aggrieved person can directly petition the Supreme Court for their enforcement.
Suspension During Emergency
During a National Emergency, the enforcement of Fundamental Rights can be suspended, except for those guaranteed under Articles 20 and 21. Additionally, the freedoms under Article 19 can be suspended only in cases of external aggression or war, and not during internal emergencies like armed rebellion.
Special Restrictions by Law
Under Article 33, Parliament is empowered to limit or revoke the application of Fundamental Rights for members of the armed forces, paramilitary, police, intelligence services, and similar bodies in the interest of discipline and national security. These rights may also be curtailed during the imposition of martial law in any part of the country.
Importance
- Fundamental Rights form the foundation of India’s democratic framework[4] and uphold the country’s commitment to secularism. They establish essential conditions for protecting individual dignity, ensuring social justice, and fostering equality. These rights also serve to defend the interests of minority communities and marginalized sections of society, while affirming personal freedoms. Crucially, they reinforce the rule of law and act as a check against the misuse of state authority.
- Protection of Personal Liberties
- These rights guarantee essential freedoms such as the right to free expression, freedom of movement, and the right to live without fear of discrimination or oppression.
- Shield Against State Overreach
- By setting constitutional boundaries on governmental authority, Fundamental Rights prevent arbitrary and unlawful actions by the state.
- Advancement of Social Justice
- They work to eliminate social inequalities and combat exploitation, laying the groundwork for a more equitable and inclusive society.
- Preservation of National Unity
- Through the protection of cultural, religious, and educational rights, these provisions help nurture India’s diversity and promote national cohesion.
- Strengthening Democratic Ideals
- Fundamental Rights are essential in upholding democratic governance, ensuring that every individual participates meaningfully in the nation’s political and social life.
Comparison between Fundamental Right and Other Rights
| Fundamental rights | Other rights |
| Fundamental Rights are constitutionally guaranteed provisions that hold a pivotal position within a nation’s legal framework. In India, they are incorporated in Part III of the Constitution (Articles 12 to 35) and constitute a core element of the country’s supreme law. | Other rights are those established through ordinary legislation, statutes, or customs, and do not carry constitutional authority. |
| Fundamental Rights are safeguarded by the Constitution, making them resistant to easy modification, restriction, or abolition by the government. If any law or government action infringes upon these rights, it can be contested in court, and the law may be declared unconstitutional. | Other rights do not have constitutional protection and can be altered or repealed by the legislature through the ordinary legislative process. While violations of these rights may not lead to the law being invalidated, individuals can still pursue remedies through the regular judicial system. |
| Fundamental Rights are justifiable, allowing individuals to directly seek enforcement through the courts. In India, Article 32 of the Constitution enables individuals to approach the Supreme Court for the protection of these rights, making it the ‘protector and guarantor’ of Fundamental Rights. Additionally, High Courts can be approached under Article 226 for the enforcement of these rights. | Other rights may not be directly enforceable by the courts in the same way as Fundamental Rights. While legal or statutory rights can generally be enforced through the regular judicial process, they do not provide a direct constitutional remedy like Fundamental Rights. |
| Fundamental Rights have broad and universal applicability, extending to all citizens and, in certain instances, even to non-citizens (such as Article 21, which applies to ‘persons’ rather than just citizens). These rights encompass vital freedoms and protections, including the right to life, freedom of speech, equality before the law, and protection from exploitation. | Other rights tend to be narrower in scope and are often context-dependent. For instance, statutory rights may apply to particular groups, situations, or legal frameworks. Examples include rights under consumer protection laws, property laws, and labor laws. |
| Fundamental Rights are protected from arbitrary amendment. | Parliament or state legislatures can modify these rights without any constitutional limitations, as long as the changes do not violate the Fundamental Rights. |
| As Fundamental Rights are embedded in the Constitution, they hold a superior legal status compared to ordinary laws. Any law that infringes upon these rights can be declared unconstitutional by the judiciary. | Other rights are subordinate to Fundamental Rights. In cases of conflict between a statutory right and a Fundamental Right, the Fundamental Right takes precedence. |
| The purpose of Fundamental Rights is to safeguard the individual freedoms and dignity of citizens, ensuring equality, liberty, and justice for all. They are designed to prevent the state from violating basic human rights and act as a check on government power. | Other rights are typically established within specific legal frameworks to address particular social or economic concerns. For example, rights under the Right to Information Act or the Consumer Protection Act are designed to empower citizens in specific areas, but they are not as comprehensive as Fundamental Rights. |
Challenge’s
- Excessive Limitations[5] – They face numerous exceptions, restrictions, and qualifications, imposing restrictions on their scope and effectiveness.
- No Social and Economic Rights – The list lacks comprehensiveness, focusing primarily on political rights without including essential social and economic rights such as the right to social security, employment, rest, leisure, etc.
- No Clarity – There is a lack of clarity as a few terms are expressed vaguely and ambiguously without a clear definition, for example- ‘public order’, ‘minorities’, ‘reasonable restrictions’, etc.
- Lack of Permanency – Fundamental Rights are not immune[6] to amendment. Parliament has the authority to restrict or abolish them, as seen in the deletion of the Right to Property as a fundamental right.
- Emergency Provisions – During a National Emergency, most fundamental rights (except Articles 20 and 21) can be suspended, which undermines democratic values and may lead to potential misuse.
- Costly Judicial Remedies -While rights are enforceable through courts, the high cost and complexity of legal proceedings hinder access to justice for economically weaker sections of society.
- Preventive Detention – Article 22 permits preventive detention, allowing the state to detain individuals without trial, which poses serious concerns for civil liberties and due process.
- Lack of a Unified Philosophy – Critics like Sir Ivor Jennings argue that the Fundamental Rights section lacks a coherent philosophical base, making interpretation difficult and often inconsistent.
Case Law
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala[7]
This historic judgment marked a turning point in constitutional law by affirming that Parliament, while possessing wide amending powers, cannot alter the “basic structure” of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that even constitutional amendments must respect this inviolable framework. This decision also underscored the judiciary’s role in safeguarding the essence and integrity of the Constitution, introducing a globally influential doctrine of constitutional limitation.
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court unanimously struck down portions of Section 377 of the IPC, decriminalizing consensual homosexual relations among adults. The Court found that the provision violated the rights to privacy, dignity, expression, equality, and protection from discrimination under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
The judgment redefined the concept of personal liberty and became a pivotal precedent for privacy-related issues, including the Aadhaar case. The Court held that the Aadhaar scheme was valid, as it involved minimal data collection and did not infringe upon the right to privacy.
- Lily Thomas v. Union of India
The Court ruled that elected representatives would be immediately disqualified upon conviction in criminal cases, without the benefit of a three-month window for appeal as previously allowed under Section 8(4) of the Representation of the People Act. This decision aimed to cleanse the political system by ensuring that convicted lawmakers could not remain in office.
- Aruna Ramachandra Shanbaug v. Union of India [8]
This case initiated India’s legal conversation around euthanasia. The Supreme Court recognized passive euthanasia, allowing withdrawal of life-support for patients unable to express informed consent.
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan
Faced with the absence of statutory protection against workplace sexual harassment, the Supreme Court issued guidelines based on international conventions like CEDAW. It provided the first authoritative definition of sexual harassment in India and effectively legislated in a legal vacuum, making this a milestone in gender justice jurisprudence.
- Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
The Court upheld OBC reservations but mandated the exclusion of the “creamy layer.” It also ruled that reservations could apply only to initial appointments, not promotions. The 77th Constitutional Amendment later allowed reservation in promotions for SCs and STs. Additionally, the Court capped total reservation at 50%.
- Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum
Although it strengthened women’s rights, the verdict sparked political controversy and debate about judicial intervention in personal laws, eventually leading to the enactment of a separate law to dilute the judgment’s impact.
Conclusion
Fundamental Rights, are crucial for the moral, intellectual, and holistic development of individuals, which is why they are termed “fundamental.” The Constitution guarantees six core Fundamental Rights: the Right to Equality, Right to Freedom, Right Against Exploitation, Right to Freedom of Religion, Cultural and Educational Rights, and the Right to Constitutional Remedies. These rights not only protect citizens from potential state overreach but also promote dignity, equality, and justice. While the interpretation and application of fundamental rights may evolve over time, their core purpose remains unchanged—to ensure that every individual is treated with fairness and respect under the rule of law. Continued vigilance and judicial oversight are essential to uphold these principles in both letter and spirit.
[1] Constitution of India
[2] Bare act
[3] dristiias
[4] nextias
[5] drishtiias
[6] legalquotient
[7] livelaw
[8] India kanoon