-
22 Nov 2023
GS Paper 2
Polity & Governance
Day 03 : How have the judicial cases changed the nature of fundamental rights over the years? (150 Words)
- Start your answer with an introduction that sets the context for the question.
- Discuss the ways in which the judicial cases have changed the nature of fundamental rights.
- Conclude suitably.
Introduction
- The Constitution of India guarantees civil liberties to all citizens through fundamental rights enshrined in Part III, which have evolved over the years through judicial interpretations. The Supreme Court has played a significant role in expanding and modifying the nature of fundamental rights through its landmark judgments.
Body
Some of the ways in which the judicial cases have changed the nature of fundamental rights are:
- Recognizing New Rights within the Existing Rights: The Supreme Court has read into the existing rights certain new rights that are not expressly mentioned in the Constitution but are implied by the spirit and purpose of the fundamental rights.
- For example, the right to privacy was recognized as a part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 in the case of Justice K S Puttaswamy vs Union of India.
- Expanding the Ambit and Content of the Existing Rights: The Supreme Court has also given a wider and more liberal interpretation to the existing rights, by adding new dimensions and aspects to them.
- For example, the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 has been expanded to include the right to health, right to clean environment, and right to speedy trial in the cases of Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union of India, M C Mehta vs Union of India, Hussainara Khatoon vs State of Bihar respectively.
- Balancing the Rights with Reasonable Restrictions: The Supreme Court has also balanced the fundamental rights with the reasonable restrictions that can be imposed on them by the state in the interest of public order, morality, security, etc. under Article 19(2) to (6). The court has applied the test of proportionality, necessity, and reasonableness to determine whether the restrictions are valid or not.
- For example, in the case of Anuradha Bhasin vs Union of India, the court held that the suspension of internet services in Jammu and Kashmir was violative of the right to freedom of speech and expression and the right to carry on trade and profession under Article 19(1)(a) and (g).
- Upholding the Supremacy and Inviolability of the Fundamental rights: The Supreme Court upholds fundamental rights as sacrosanct and inviolable over other provisions of the Constitution. Basic structure doctrine prevents Parliament from amending the Constitution in a way that violates the fundamental rights.
- For example, in the case of Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala, the court held that the Parliament cannot amend the fundamental rights in a manner that affects the basic structure of the Constitution.
Conclusion
Judicial cases improved fundamental rights by making them more dynamic, comprehensive, and effective. The Supreme Court protected and promoted these rights, preventing violation or dilution by the state or other authorities. These cases also enriched constitutional jurisprudence and developed human rights culture in India.
