Article 14 of the Indian constitution with case laws| equality before law
Article 14:- equality before law:- The state shall not deny any
person equality before the law or equal protection under the law within the
territory of India.
Article 14 guarantees to every person, including non- citizens and
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, queer aur questioning persons are the
community (LGBTQ), the right to equality before law or the equal protection of
laws. According to some, the phrase "equality before law" was
originally used in English common law, and it states that all people are equal
before the law, is a
proclamation of all people' equality before the law, meaning the absence of any
special privilege in any individual. Every individual, regardless of rank or
position, is subject to the jurisdiction of the regular Court. Dicey described
the notion of legal equality as it existed in England, saying that "with
us every official, from P.M. down to constable or collector of Texas, is under
the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as
any other citizen".
All
individuals within the territorial jurisdiction of the union shall be granted
equal protection in the enjoyment of their rights and privileges without
favouritism or discrimination, according to the second phrase, "equalprotection of laws," which is actually a corollary of the first and is
based on the final clause of the first section of the 14th amendment to the US
Constitution. According to some, "the equal protection of the laws"
is a promise or assurance of equal legal protection. "Equal protection of
the laws" in now being read as a positive obligation on the state to
ensure protection of the laws by bringing in necessary social and economic
changes, so that everyone may enjoy equal protection of the laws nobody is
denied such protection. if the state leaves the existing inequalities untouched
by it is laws, it fails in it is duty of providing equal protection of it is
large to all persons".
It is also acknowledged that equality is one
of the fundamental elements of the constitution.
Underlying principle:- equality before the law or equal protection of
the laws does not mean the same or uniform treatment to everyone. Since no two
human beings are same in every way, treating them equally would lead to uneven
treatment. For example, the same treatment in all respects to a child as to an
adult, or to a sick or physically challenged person as to a healthy person, or
to a rich person as to poor, will result in unequal treatment. Accordingly, the
fundamental tenet of equality is not to treat everyone in the same way in every
way, but rather to treat them similarly in the philosophical areas where they
are similar and differently in the areas where they differ. In short, this is
expressed as "equals must be treated equally while unequal must be treated
differently." Equality not only prohibits unequal treatment (negative
equality) but it also demands equal treatment ( positive equality). Must not
only treat people unequally but it must also take positive status to remove
existing inequalities, especially those inequalities which treat human beings
less than human beings. Our common humanity, also expressed as human dignity,
demand distributive to justice both of which dignity and distributive justice
are essential to Equality.
Two dimensions of article 14:
1. Doctrine of reasonable classification:
Legislative classification:
The right to equality, incorporated in article 14 and discussed above, required
legislation for it is operation so that equal is must be treated equally and
un-equals must be treated differently. As we have seen, the principles of
equality do not imply that laws must apply universally to everyone who is not
in the same situation or by nature. Different therapy is needed for different
types of people due to their differing needs.
In Kedarnath bajoriya versus state of West Bengal. According to some,
the equal protection of laws guaranteed by Article 14 of the Constitution does
not imply that all laws must be universally applicable and general in nature,
nor does it revoke the state's authority to categorise and distinguish between
people under pressure or objects for legislative purposes.
2. Valid classification test:
A
classification must be reasonable in order to be considered valid. It must
always be based on a genuine and significant distinction that has a fair and
reasonable connection to the requirements or goals for which the categorisation
is being created. Two requirements must be met in order to pass the test for
permitted categorisation, specifically
1. Intelligible differentia: It
refers to a characteristic or feature that distinguishes a particle of group of
people are things from other in a clear and rational way.
2. Rational relationship: The
differentia must make sense in regard to the goal that the legislation in
question is trying to accomplish.
The supreme court in a number of
cases have established certain important principles which further elucidate the
scope snapshot of permissible classification. these may be stated as follows;
Case laws
R.K. Dalmia V. justice S.R Tendulkar, AIR 1958
1. Reasonable classification means permissible
classification.
2. Allah passed by statute maybe constitution
even though it relates to a single individual based on some special
circumstances applicable to him only not others.
3. There is also a presumption of
legality in Parliament to make laws and their burden is upon him who challenges
law.
4. It must be assumed that the
Legislature is aware of and appropriately respects the needs of its own
citizens, and that any discrimination, if it occurs, is justified.
5. The validity of the law is to
be tested all the aspects in the consideration then they classification is
valid.
6. To Equality is available not
only regarding privilege and favours but also regarding imposition of
burdens(liability)
Chiranjit Lal Choudhary V. Union
of India AIP 1951
Kalla kurichi Taluk retired official Association V. Tamil Nadu AIR 2013
A classification to be valid must
necessarily certify two testes firstly the distinguishing rationale has to
based of just objective secondly the choice of differentiating one set of
persons from another must have a reasonable Nexus(connection) the objective
sought to be achieved.
Article 14's new dimensions (the theory of arbitrariness)
Expending Horizons of equality:
Since the beginning of the 1970s, equality under Article 14 has taken on
significant new dimensions. until then, as we have noted above, the requirement
of article 14 were met if a law or administrative action satisfied the
reasonable classification test. Towards the end of 1973, however justice
Bhagwati, speaking for himself, chandrachud and Krishna iyer JJ in a conquering
opinion in In the words of E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamilnadu, a novel
interpretation of Article 14 was established. It is impossible to constrain,
trap, and compartmentalise equality inside conventional and doctrinaire
boundaries since it is a dynamic notion with numerous facets and dimensions.
Positively speaking, equality is the opposite of arbitrariness. Equality and
arbitrariness are actually sworn adversaries; one is subject to the whims and
caprices of an absolute monarchy, while the other is subject to the rule of law
in a republic. When an act is arbitrary, it implies that it is unfair in
accordance with both political reasoning and constitutional law, which is why
it violates article 14'.
Manika Gandhi V. Union of India,
quoting himself from the EP royappa case, Bhagwati very clearly read the
principle of reasonable Ness in Article 14. He said, Article 14 at arbitrainess
in state action and ensure fairness and equality of treatment. the principle of
reasonableness, bijali Gali as well as philosophical, is an essential element
of equality or non arbitariness Pervades Article 14 like a brooding
omnipresence.
Related Posts
Article 15 of the indian constitution
Article 16 of the indian constitution
Article 14 of the indian constitution
What is constitution its importance and features
what is bill of right and fundamental rights
