Sambhav-2025

Approach In introduction, define fundamental rights and reasonable restrictions. Explain their significance and necessity. Provide supporting and opposing arguments with case laws. Conclude with the need for a balanced approach.

Introduction

The Indian Constitution guarantees Fundamental Rights to ensure personal liberty, dignity, and equality. However, it also imposes reasonable restrictions to protect public order, morality, and national security. This creates a paradox- while rights empower individuals, their limitations ensure societal harmony. The key issue is whether these restrictions are reasonable or excessive, affecting democratic values.

Body

Fundamental Rights:

• Part III of the Indian Constitution grants six Fundamental Rights to citizens:

Fundamental Right	Articles	Key Provisions
Right to Equality	14-18	Prohibits discrimination and abolishes untouchability.
Right to Freedom	19-22	Includes freedom of speech, expression, movement, and personal liberty.
Right Against Exploitation	23-24	Prohibits human trafficking, bonded labor, and child labor.
Right to Freedom of Religion	25-28	Ensures religious freedom while maintaining public order.
Cultural and Educational Rights	29-30	Protects minority communities’ right to culture and education.
Right to Constitutional Remedies	32	Allows individuals to move courts for rights enforcement.

Reasonable Restrictions:

Fundamental Rights are not absolute and come with constitutional restrictions:

• Article 19: Restrictions on freedoms for sovereignty, security, public order, decency, morality, defamation, incitement to offense, contempt of court, and friendly relations with foreign states.
• Article 21: Right to life can be curtailed through legal procedures like capital punishment.
• Article 25: Religious freedom is limited if it disrupts public order, health, or morality.
• During a National Emergency: During a National Emergency (Article 352), Article 358 suspends Article 19 (only during war or external aggression).
  • Article 359 allows the President to suspend enforcement of Fundamental Rights, except Articles 20 and 21.
• Arguments Supporting Restrictions:
  • Prevention of Absolute Freedom: Unlimited rights can lead to anarchy and social unrest.
  • National Security and Integrity: Restrictions prevent anti-state activities and terrorism.
  • Maintaining Public Order: Speech that incites violence, hatred, or communal disharmony is restricted.
  • Social Justice and Equality: Limits on caste-based practices, child labor, and religious customs promote social reform.
• Arguments Against Excessive Restrictions
  • Potential for Misuse: Legal provisions like sedition and UAPA are often used to suppress dissent.
  • Vague Terminology: Words like "morality" and "public order" are subjective, leading to arbitrary enforcement.
  • Judicial Overreach: Courts sometimes uphold executive actions, restricting rights disproportionately.
  • Violation of Democratic Values: Frequent internet shutdowns and restrictions on protests weaken democracy.
• Landmark Cases on Balancing Rights and Restrictions
  • Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973): Established Basic Structure Doctrine, preventing arbitrary amendment of fundamental rights.
  • Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded Article 21, making restrictions fair, just, and reasonable.
  • Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015): Struck down Section 66A of IT Act, reinforcing freedom of speech.
  • Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017): Recognized right to privacy, allowing reasonable state intervention.
  • Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017): Declared Triple Talaq unconstitutional, ensuring gender justice over religious practices.
• The Delicate Balance Between Rights and Control
  • Too many restrictions weaken democracy, but unchecked rights can create disorder.
  • The judiciary ensures a balance between individual freedoms and societal interests.
  • The Constitution evolves to meet new legal and social challenges.

Conclusion

The Constitution attempts to balance individual liberties with collective security and order. While restrictions are necessary to prevent misuse of rights, they should not be arbitrary or excessive. A democratic system thrives when fundamental rights are protected, and restrictions serve public interest without curbing freedoms unjustly.