Article 14 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the fundamental right to “equality before the law” and “equal protection of the laws” to all citizens. It is a cornerstone of the Indian legal framework and forms the bedrock of constitutional democracy. By establishing equality as a core principle, Article 14 ensures that every person is treated fairly by the state without arbitrary discrimination.
“The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.”
This single sentence embodies two significant concepts that are foundational to the rule of law:
The phrase “equality before the law” is derived from British law. It implies that no individual, regardless of rank or status, is above the law. This principle guarantees that all individuals are subject to the same laws and legal procedures. The law does not discriminate based on personal or social factors like religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
This principle signifies equal subjection to the law of the land and applies to public servants and ordinary citizens alike.
The concept of “equal protection of the laws” originates from the American legal system, particularly the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It requires the state to apply laws equally to all individuals in similar circumstances. The state cannot arbitrarily favor or discriminate against any group.
However, the concept recognizes that equality does not mean uniformity. The state can make reasonable classifications for legislation and policies as long as they are based on intelligible differentia (a clear distinction between groups) and have a rational nexus with the objective of the law.
One of the most important aspects of Article 14 is that it allows for reasonable classification of individuals, provided the classification is not arbitrary and has a legitimate objective. The Supreme Court of India, in its various judgments, has upheld this doctrine by emphasizing that while the law must treat equals equally, it can treat unequals unequally in order to achieve substantive equality.
The two conditions required for reasonable classification:
For example, reservation policies based on socioeconomic backwardness are upheld under Article 14 as they aim to uplift historically disadvantaged communities.
Article 14 is a safeguard against arbitrariness in state actions. In the landmark case of E.P. Royappa vs State of Tamil Nadu (1974), the Supreme Court introduced the concept that equality and arbitrariness are sworn enemies. Any arbitrary action by the state, whether in policy or individual decision-making, violates Article 14.
The Indian legal system uses Article 14 as a basis for affirmative action, such as reservations and welfare schemes for marginalized groups. The court has balanced the equality principle by recognizing the need for special measures to promote social and economic equality.
For example, the Mandal Commission case (Indra Sawhney vs Union of India, 1992) upheld the reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) on the ground that the state has the authority to take affirmative steps for the advancement of socially and educationally backward classes to achieve true equality.
Article 14 has also been used extensively in cases involving administrative actions. Any discretionary power given to administrative authorities must be exercised within reasonable limits to ensure equality before the law. Arbitrary or excessive discretion is a violation of Article 14.
The Rule of Law is integral to the application of Article 14. The law must apply to all individuals equally, and public officials are also subject to the law. Any action by the state that does not conform to the principles of fairness, transparency, or reasonableness can be challenged as unconstitutional under Article 14.
Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India (1978) – The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 14, linking it with Articles 19 (Right to Freedom) and 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty). It held that a law must be “just, fair, and reasonable,” ensuring that arbitrary laws or actions would be struck down under Article 14.
D.S. Nakara vs Union of India (1983) – This judgment expanded the concept of equality to include economic rights, holding that pension schemes must treat retirees equally, thus furthering the idea of social justice under Article 14.
Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018) – In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court decriminalized homosexuality, stating that laws discriminating based on sexual orientation violate Article 14.
Article 14 is highly significant for aspirants preparing for the Civil Services Examination, especially for the Indian Polity and Governance section. Key points to focus on:
Mastering Article 14 will help aspirants grasp fundamental principles of Indian law and governance, which are essential for writing effective answers in the Mains Exam and performing well in the Prelims.
Maximize the benefits of mock tests for IAS and KAS preparation with guidance from Amoghavarsha IAS Academy . For more details, visit https://amoghavarshaiaskas.in/.
Youtube: click here
Amoghavarsha IAS/KAS Academy was founded in 2014 since from their we have been excellence in the field of civil Service examination preparation and state services. The Academy is completely dedicated to provide excellent quality education by experts and bringing innovations etc.
Copyright © 2014 – 2024 Amoghavarsha IAS Academy. All Rights Reserved
Developed & Maintained by BIGGSITE
Amoghavarsha E Magazine
Current Affairs ( Prelims )
UPSC
KPSC