Constitutional Law

• Concepts covered: Concept, Relevance, Constitutionalism and Sources of Constitution
• Salient Features of the Indian Constitution Preamble and its Importance Concept of Citizenship Origin
• Importance of Fundamental Rights Enforceability of Fundamental Rights
• Definition of ‘State’? Other Authorities under Article 12
• Definition of Law in Article 13 Doctrine of Severability, Doctrine of Eclipse and Doctrine of Waiver

1. Define the concept, importance, constitutionalism, and sources of the Constitution.

Indian Constitution is the final legal book that rules the political and legal framework of India. The concept of a constitution is to create fundamental principles based on which a country's administration is established. It provides information about functions of various organs of the State and safeguards rights of citizens. The Indian Constitution came into operation on 26 January 1950, was born due to the need to consolidate a newly independent country under one over-riding legal system.

The value of the Constitution is its capacity to check power. It gives checks and balances between the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary, but places primacy on law. Constitutionalism, therefore, is the belief that governmental power originates from and is limited by the Constitution. 

It promotes the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights against arbitrary power. The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala  declared constitutional supremacy by formulating the basic structure doctrine, considering that the basic features of the Constitution cannot be amended even by Parliament.

The sources of the Indian Constitution are foreign and indigenous. The framers adapted features from different constitutions from all over the world. The United States imparted judicial review and basic rights, Britain imparted the parliamentary tradition, Ireland imparted directive principles, and Canada imparted federalism with a centralizing bias. 

Although it also kept parts of India's own traditions, such as the panchayat system and federal cohesiveness in diversity. The Constituent Assembly Debates illustrate how Dr. B.R. Ambedkar and others made universal concepts conform to Indian needs, accomplishing adaptability and democratic continuity.

Consequently, our constitution is not a mere legal document and its concept, relevance, and foundations together collectively contain the vision of a sovereign democratic republic under which constitutionalism ensures power shall be accountable to the people through law.

2. List the pertinent features of the Indian Constitution.

The Indian Constitution is renowned for its balance between rigidity and flexibility, and it is therefore the longest written constitution in the world. Its salient feature is that it is comprehensive and it consists of 470 articles divided into 25 parts and 12 schedules that cover all areas of governance. Its key features as a whole outline the vision of India as a sovereign socialist secular democratic republic.

The Constitution establishes a federal system with a unitary bias. The Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v. Union of India  held that while federal in character, the Constitution of India is quasi-federal as the Centre possesses more powers in emergency situations as well as in legislative areas. It declares the Constitution supreme, and all organs of the government are subservient to its provisions.

Another distinguishing aspect of the Indian system is the parliamentary system of government, in which the executive is answerable to the legislature. This ensures democratic administration by collective responsibility, such as in Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab, in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed the fact that the President and Governors perform their functions on the advice and assistance of their respective Councils of Ministers.

Basic Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy are the constitutional moral and legal core. While the former guarantees citizen's liberties, the latter enunciates directions for the establishment of a welfare state. In Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that both must coexist side by side in harmony for an even constitutional order.

Lastly, the Constitution guarantees independence of the judiciary to act as the watchdog of the Constitution and defender of rights. Through the power of judicial review, as settled in Kesavananda Bharati and Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain, the judiciary can guarantee that all organs are kept within constitutional limits.
Accordingly, the most important features of our constitution make it a living document which is firm in principle but flexible enough to adapt itself to the changing needs of the nation.

3. Describe the importance of the Preamble in the interpretation of the Constitution.

The Preamble is the ideological key to the our constitution and it illustrates the ideals, aims, and spirit of the constitution. It declares India a Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, and Democratic Republic with the promise of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. Although the Preamble is not judicially enforceable, it shines like a beacon of light for Constitutional interpretation.

In. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala , the Supreme Court held that the Preamble is a. part of the Constitution and can be utilized in interpretation of indeterminate provisions. The Court reaffirmed that it captures the essential structure of the Constitution, which cannot be altered by way of amendment. Similarly, in Re Berubari Union Case the Court first held that the Preamble is not a source of power, but post-Kesavananda, its interpretative role was settled beyond controversy.

The term "Sovereign" means freedom in domestic and international affairs; "Socialist" implies an economic order aiming at equal allocation; "Secular" provides for equal treatment of all religions, "Democratic" implies rule by the people's will and "Republic" means that the head of the state is chosen. All these terms were interpreted in S.R. Bommai v. Union of India, wherein the Court held secularism to be integral to the basic structure of the Constitution.

The Preamble is also a touchstone for assessing constitutional amendments and government policies. The Preamble encompasses the revolutionary vision of the Constitution to establish social and economic democracy alongside political democracy. The Preamble is thus a moral compass and interpretive lens for understanding the Constitution's vision of sustainable justice and equality.

4. Define the concept of citizenship in the Constitution.

Concept of citizenship as per the Indian Constitution enunciates the legal status of citizens as members of the Indian State and confers some rights and obligations upon them. Articles 5 to 11 of the Constitution deal with the regulation of citizenship as of the date of the coming into operation of the Constitution.

Article 5 gives citizenship to those residing in India at the time of the Constitution's coming into operation, and Articles 6 and 7 give citizenship to those who entered India from Pakistan and those who entered Pakistan from India on account of partition. Article 8 gives the Indians residing abroad the right of citizenship, and Article 9 prohibits dual citizenship. Under Article 11, Parliament can make a provision by law governing citizenship, and in the exercise of such power, the Citizenship Act, was passed.

The Act has established citizenship by birth, descent, registration, naturalization, and addition of territory. Domicile and parentage conditions have been added subsequently to exclude abuse.

Judicial interpretation has established that citizenship is a legal as well as a political status. In Izhar Ahmad Khan v. Union of India, the Supreme Court established Parliament's power to make decisions on matters of citizenship. The Court has also emphasized that certain basic rights, including those found in Articles 15, 16, and 19, are only to be enjoyed by citizens.

Hence, citizenship in the Constitution is greater than a formality and a bond of allegiance to the Indian State, determining political participation and constitutional entitlement.

5. Explain the genesis and importance of Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution.

Basic Rights, contained in Part III of the Constitution, are traceable to the idea of human dignity and the notion that the State must be restrained by law. Their origin may be found in international documents such as the American Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and in India's national movement itself, where leaders like Nehru and Ambedkar emphasized civil liberties.

The importance of Fundamental Rights is that they act as a safeguard against capricious State action. They ensure equality before law, liberty and freedom of speech and association, and protection of life and liberty, and protection against discrimination and exploitation. The judiciary has accorded these provisions a broad play. In Maneka Gandhi v. UOI, the Court held that right to life includes the right to live with dignity and personal liberty need not be curtailed except by fair, reasonable, and just procedure.

These have been made judicially enforceable under Article 32, which Dr. B.R. Ambedkar also called the heart and soul of the Constitution. The Supreme Court in A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras had at first a strict meaning of liberty, but Maneka Gandhi enlarged it, connecting Articles 14, 19, and 21.

These Basic Rights thus encapsulate the spirit of the constitutional democratic values and constitute the foundation of the rule of law, which bears to ensure that liberty of the individual is protected under constitutional rule.

7. Explain the term 'State' as defined under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution and its importance.

Article 12 provides a definition of the term "State" for the sake of enforcing Fundamental Rights. This definition covers the Government and the Parliament of India, the Government and Legislature of the various States, and all local or other authorities in the territory of India or under the control of India. This definition ensures the enforcement of Fundamental Rights both against governmental authorities and against authorities exercising public functions.

The judiciary has applied Article 12 in a wide sense to embrace statutory bodies, corporations, and law created authorities. In Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, the Supreme Court stated that bodies undertaking governmental or public functions came under the term "State." 

Subsequently, in the case of Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram, the Court applied this understanding to statutory corporations like ONGC and LIC, as they were engaged in public functions.

The agency or instrumentality test was also explicated in Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, where Justice P.N. Bhagwati ruled that even non statutory organizations could come under the defination of state if they were functionally, financially, and administratively controlled by the government. 

This was upheld in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, which gave in-depth criteria in ascertaining if an organization is an instrumentality of the State.

The importance of this definition is that Fundamental Rights will be enforceable against all authorities exercising public power. The wide interpretation does not allow the State to avoid constitutional responsibility by passing on its functions to autonomous authorities. Article 12, therefore, enforces the principle that constitutional duties follow all exercises of public power.

8. Explain the role of 'other authorities' under Article 12 in enforcing Fundamental Rights.

The term "other authorities" in Article 12 of the Indian Constitution widens the concept of State from the traditional governmental organs to all bodies exercising public functions or established by law. This widening helps in making the scope of the Fundamental Rights not restricted to the traditional government organs but also includes institutions performing public functions.

The Supreme Court in University of Madras v. Shantha Bai initially took a strict view, restricting "other authorities" to those established by the Constitution or by legislation. But in Electricity Board, Rajasthan v. Mohan Lal, the Court enlarged the scope and held that authorities established by law and invested with power to influence legal rights would come within the term.

The most important expansion was in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, in which the Court established a detailed test for deciding whether a body was an instrumentality or agency of the government. 

It focused on government control, funding, and the character of the functions discharged. Applying the above test, the Court held that a society registered under the Societies Registration Act was also a "State" under Article 12 if it performed public objectives under the control of the government.

This principle was reaffirmed later in Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology, where the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research was considered to be "State" under Article 12 due to widespread government control.

Therefore, "other authorities" in Article 12 are responsible for protecting Fundamental Rights from being eroded by administrative delegation. This judicial approach is indicative of the dynamic nature of the Constitution and its effort to render enforcement of rights substantial in a contemporary welfare state.

9. Describe the meaning of 'law' in Article 13 of the Constitution.

Article 13 states that all such laws that are inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights shall be void. The term law is defined to include ordinances, orders, bylaws, rules, regulations, notifications, and customs or usages having the force of law. This article is a protection against arbitrary legislative or executive action.

In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, the Supreme Court first took a limited approach, stating that "procedure established by law" enactments could not be tested on the basis of fairness alone. This position was largely enlarged in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, where the Court interpreted Articles 21, 14, and 19 together, making any legislation fair, just, and reasonable.

Article 13(2) debarred the State from enacting legislation curtailing or depriving Fundamental Rights, whereas Article 13(1) renders pre-constitutional laws repugnant to Part III ineffective. This article is the foundation of the judicial review doctrine, authorizing courts to invalidate unconstitutional legislation.

In Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay, the Court explained that only the inconsistent portion of a law comes to be void, and not the entire law, thereby opening the doors for the doctrine of severability.

Thus, Article 13 is the constitutional pledge to the rule of Fundamental Rights over other laws, making any law amenable to constitutional examination and the concept of rule of law.

10. Define the doctrines of severability, eclipse, and waiver as applied to Fundamental Rights.

Judicial interpretation of Article 13 has given rise to the doctrines of severability, eclipse, and waiver in order to uphold legislative intent and safeguard Fundamental Rights.

The doctrine of severability, recognized in R.M.D.C. v. Union of India, states that where part of a statute is contrary to Fundamental Rights, that offending portion is declared void, and the rest are valid, subject to the two being distinguishable. This prevents legislative attempts from being wholly nullified for partial incongruence.

The principle of eclipse is mainly applicable to pre-Constitutional legislation. As established in Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of Madhya Pradesh, where a law valid when enacted becomes inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights after the Constitution has come into effect, it is not void but only eclipsed, and it is dormant until the inconsistency is obviated, e.g., by a constitutional amendment.

The theory of waiver, however, addresses whether one can waive their Fundamental Rights voluntarily. In Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner of Income Tax, the Supreme Court ruled that Fundamental Rights cannot be waived since they are guaranteed not only for the good of individuals but also as a public policy measure to ensure constitutional rule.