Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India
The Fundamental Rights are defined in Part III of the Indian Constitution from article 12 to 35 and applied irrespective of race, birth place, religion, caste, creed, sex, gender, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment.
These provisions, set out in Part IV of the Constitution, are not enforceable by the courts, but the principles on which they are based are fundamental guidelines for governance that the State is expected to apply in framing any policies and passing of laws.
[4] The unsatisfactory Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms of 1919, and the rise to prominence of M. K. Gandhi in the Indian independence movement marked a change in the attitude of its leaders towards articulating demands for civil rights.
[6] In 1927, the INC resolved to set up a committee to draft a "Swaraj Constitution" for India based on a declaration of rights that would provide safeguards against oppression.
Other new rights proposed by the resolution were the prohibition of State titles, universal adult franchise, the abolition of capital punishment and freedom of movement.
[8] The final phase of the Independence movement saw a reiteration of the socialist principles of the 1930s, along with an increased focus on minority rights – which had become an issue of major political concern by then – which were published in the Sapru Report in 1945.
[11] According to the Cabinet Mission plan, the Assembly was to have an Advisory Committee to advise it on the nature and extent of fundamental rights, protection of minorities and administration of tribal areas.
[20][note 2] The purpose of the Fundamental Rights is to preserve individual liberty and democratic principles based on equality of all members of society.
[28] The Fundamental Rights can be enhanced, removed or otherwise altered through a constitutional amendment, passed by a two-thirds majority of each House of Parliament.
[31] Parliament may also restrict the application of the Fundamental Rights to members of the Indian Armed Forces and the police, in order to ensure proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline, by a law made under Article 33.
[33] Despite being non-justiciable, the Directive Principles act as a check on the state; theorised as a yardstick in the hands of the electorate and the opposition to measure the performance of a government at the time of an election.
Article 39 lays down certain principles of policy to be followed by the State, including providing an adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, equal pay for equal work for men and women, proper working conditions, reduction of the concentration of wealth and means of production from the hands of a few, and distribution of community resources to "subserve the common good".
[42] Article 39A requires the State to provide free legal aid to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are available to all citizens irrespective of economic or other disabilities.
[44] Article 44 encourages the State to secure a uniform civil code for all citizens, by eliminating discrepancies between various personal laws currently in force in the country.
[49] The State is also mandated by Article 48 to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines by improving breeds and prohibiting slaughter of cattle.
[47] The other fundamental duties obligate all citizens to respect the national symbols of India, including the constitution, to cherish its heritage, preserve its composite culture and assist in its defence.
They also obligate all Indians to promote the spirit of common brotherhood, protect the environment and public property, develop scientific temper, abjure violence, and strive towards excellence in all spheres of life.
[61] The government provides free textbooks to students belonging to scheduled castes and tribes pursuing medicine and engineering courses.
[70] The implementation of a uniform civil code for all citizens has not been achieved owing to widespread opposition from various religious groups and political parties.
[71] This act provoked further outrage, as jurists, critics and politicians alleged that the fundamental right of equality for all citizens irrespective of religion or gender was being jettisoned to preserve the interests of distinct religious communities.
The verdict and the legislation remain a source of heated debate, with many citing the issue as a prime example of the poor implementation of Fundamental Rights.
However the judiciary is failing in this respect by causing inordinate delay considering time of rendering justice in a case arbitrarily is its constitutional liberty.
The application of this article was sought to be extended to all the Directive Principles by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, but the Supreme Court struck down the extension as void on the ground that it violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
[75] The Supreme Court, after the judgment in the Kesavananda Bharati case, has adopted the view of the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles being complementary to each other, each supplementing the other's role in aiming at the same goal of establishing a welfare state by means of social revolution.
[56] The Supreme Court has also issued directions to the State in this regard, with a view towards making the provisions effective and enabling citizens to properly perform their duties.
