A.

The Preamble: Its Importance and Utility

1. What is the nature and significance of the Preamble to the Constitution? [10]
Ans- The preamble is an introduction to our Indian constitution and contains the key points that provide us with a
better understanding of the Indian constitution. Not just this, in case of ambiguity, to understand any article, the
preamble gives a better and easier explanation. The Preamble to an act sets out the main objectives which the
legislation is intended to achieve. It is a sort of introduction to the statute and many a time very helpful to
understand the policy and legislative intent. It embodies in a solemn form all the ideals and aspirations for which
the country had struggled during the British regime. As sir Alladi Krishnaswami said in the constitutional Assembly
Debate, the preamble expresses “what we had thought or dreamt for so long as a country.” The constitution
makers gave the preamble “the place of pride.”

In the Berubari case, 1960 the Supreme court said that the preamble to the constitution is a key to opening the
mind of the makers, and shows the general purpose for which they made the several provisions in the constitution.

The Preamble declares that:

“We, the people of India having solemnly resolved to constitute India into [Sovereign, Socialist, Secular Democratic
Republic] and to secure to all its citizens: Justice, social, economic and political:

Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship:

Equality of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all;

Fraternity assures the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation.

In our constituent assembly, this 26 th day of November 1949 do hereby, adopt, enact, and give to ourselves this
constitution.”

The 'Preamble' of the Constitution of India is a brief introductory statement that sets out the guiding purpose and
principles of the document, and it indicates the source from which the document which derives its authority,
meaning, the people. It provides a standard to examine and evaluate any law and action of government, to find out
whether it is good or bad.

2. Discuss the various objectives enshrined in the Preamble to the Constitution of India. [8]

Answer- The Preamble is the introduction of the Indian constitution and gives us an idea about the main objectives
of the Indian constitution. Let us understand and elaborate on the main objectives of the Indian constitution and
understand each in detail. The various objectives of the preamble include sovereignty, secularism, democracy,
socialism, republic, equality, liberty, and fraternity.

 Equal social, economic, and political justice: the preamble describes that a country should inculcate a
society devoid of discrimination of caste, colour, and creed. People should have equal status and should be
helpful to the less privileged. All types of exploitation under the name of caste and colour should be
abandoned.

 Freedom to express thought, beliefs, and faith to worship: liberty of thoughts, expressions, and faith is the
key to a prosperous nation. It imbibes neutral values regarding all religions and does not enact any firm
beliefs. It allows each individual to worship their faith.

 Providing equal status and opportunity: to provide equal opportunities to all individuals by abolishing all
discrimination based on religion, caste, and creed. Equality is the most magnificent pillar of Indian
democracy. It is an essential cornerstone of the preamble of the constitution.
  Assure dignity to all individuals: ensuring dignity to all the citizens, devoid of social and economic status.
Every individual should live a life with dignity and respect, which should be met by economic justice.

 People are the Source of the Constitution: as we start reading the constitution of India, it starts from “ we
the people of India”. The constitution signifies that it has been formed by the house of representatives
elected by the country’s people.

 States the type of Government in the country to be established: the Preamble dictates the country to
have a transparent government and political system. A justifiable government would be a secular,
sovereign, democratic, socialist, republic and will protect the rights of the people.

 Rights of the people- the Preamble defines the rights of the people as providing them with the
fundamental rights of justice, fraternity, liberty, and equality.

3. Explain the terms "Sovereign", "Democratic", "Socialist" and "Secular". [8]

Sovereignty

The word sovereignty is derived from the Latin word “superanus“, which means supreme or paramount.
Sovereignty is the most important element of the state. It confers legal status on the state’s actions. It’s sovereignty
that allows the state to exercise legitimate control over all the laws, rules, policies, and decisions. 
The idea of sovereignty goes back to Aristotle, who spoke of the “Supreme power of the state.”
This entitles supreme, uncontrollable, and absolute powers to the government of our country. This is the backbone
of our Indian constitution and protects the rights of the people. Sovereignty can be of two types, internal
sovereignty, and external sovereignty. The state can exercise internal sovereignty control by establishing laws,
enforcing laws, and punishing those who violate them. In contrast, external sovereignty declares the government
as the supreme authority and entitles Any state to pursue its free independent foreign policy.  In other words, in
external sovereignty, a state will not face any interference from the other state on the international level. De Jure
sovereign comes to power by elections and the sovereign has the legal right to exercise powers and issue
commands. De Facto Sovereign comes to power under factual circumstances. Their basis of authority is to force
the Sovereign to acquire power by revolution or coup.

Socialist

Socialism is characterized by social ownership (government ownership) of the means of production, as opposed

to private ownership. It is one of the most important parts of the objectives of the Indian constitution. Socialism
ensures equality among people and ensures their welfare. The main purpose of adding socialistic features to the
Indian constitution is to ensure fair and equal opportunities for all concerning income and status. Socialism expels
capitalism which is considered to be a threat to the economy. The main motto of this objective is to end all forms of
discrimination and exploitation of any person based on their religion, caste, region, or creed.  The 42nd amendment
of the constitution has inserted the word Secularism in the preamble. The amendment merely spells out clearly
these concepts in the preamble. Although, it was already mentioned in the preamble itself as the term “economic
Justice” in the preamble denoting socioeconomic of the country. Also, in DPSP in articles 39 (b) and (c) for creating
social and economic liberties for the people in the country.

Secularism

With the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution of India (1976), the Preamble to the Constitution asserted that India
is a “secular” nation. The meaning of a secular state is that it does not prioritize any one religion for the country
and its people. This objective of the Indian constitution was introduced to ensure the maintenance of peace among
different communities. It ensures the development and unity of various communities and religions. Articles 25 to 28
of the Indian constitution ensure freedom of religion and prohibit any discrimination on the ground of religion. It is
one of the aims and objectives of the salient features of the Indian constitution, and it was added to make clear
that religion has no place in the matters of the state. Secularism in India means equal treatment of all religions by
the state.

Democratic

Democracy means “rule of the people.” The name is taken from the Greek words demos (“people”) and Kratos
(”rule”). Practiced in Greek city-states at the time, most notably Athens. A democratic country should have
elections, in some form or another, on a regular basis, as one of the basic characteristics of democracy. By including
democracy as an objective of the Indian constitution, the constitution entitles the citizens of India with the power
to govern. India has adopted parliamentary democracy, which ensures a responsible and stable government. The
ruler of the country is elected by the people, and the ruler is later answerable to the people. Democracy ensures
stability and entitles the people to change their rules as per their will and practice universal adult franchise, i.e. One
man, one vote. Periodic conduct of elections is practiced so that people are entitled to the right to elect their
representatives. It is critical that the administration and the courts work together to maintain the public’s faith in
them and to preserve “constitutional governance.”

Republic

These elections represent the people’s voice. This concept was inspired by the constitution of France. It entitles
people to the power to elect their representatives. The concept of a republic lays down the foundation of our
country’s government by ensuring that there will be no hereditary ruler, and the elections will be held at regular
intervals of time to elect a representative and ruler of the people. Republic India is among the most important aims
and objectives of the salient features of the Indian constitution.

Justice and liberty

The objectives of the Indian constitution also include social, economic, and political justice and the liberty to follow
any religion, any job, and any work without the interference of the state. All the citizens of India are entitled to a
basic set of fundamental rights that ensure and protect their interests. Freedom of expression through belief,
religion, worship, and faith is ensured for every single citizen of the country.

Dignity/ Fraternity

The constitution entitles every person to live their life with dignity. The government ensures the quality of life for
all its citizens under Part 4 of the constitution. Every citizen has the right to live a meaningful life, and no one in any
way can interfere in their way of living.

4. Is the Preamble a part of the Constitution? {Is the Preamble enforceable in the Courts? [6]}
Answer- The ideals enshrined in the Constitution are represented in the Preamble, which was enacted together
with the Constitution on November 26, 1949. The fact that it was accepted by the Constituent Assembly after the
Draft Constitution has ratified backs up this claim that it represents the Constitution’s purpose and ideology. It not
only states the Constitution’s goals but also identifies the source of the Constitution’s power. One of the common
discussions going on is whether the preamble is a part of the constitution or not has been a point of contention.
Two examples show the preamble’s status:

Berubari Case

Even while the preamble serves as an introduction to the constitution and is, without a doubt, an idea that opens
the minds of the creators and aids them in the creation of a constitution, the eight-judge panel found that the
preamble is not a component of the constitution.

Kesavananda Bharati case

The preamble is a component of the constitution, according to the thirteen-judge bench, as follows:
The constitution’s preamble serves as an introduction. The prologue does not have any legal authority, but it does
play a significant part in interpreting the statutes.

As a result, the Preamble to the Indian Constitution serves as the foundation for the whole structure. It helps to
make the Indian Constitution a living document. It echoes India’s Constitution’s central idea. “We the People of
India” is a phrase or statement that refers to the Constitution’s source and power. It is a declaration of the
Constitution’s goals, objectives, and philosophy. The Preamble is a guide to interpreting the Constitution’s
provisions and is regarded as a key to opening the minds of the Constitution’s framers. It is the genesis of India’s
Constitution; it is a portion of the textual Constitution that embodies the experiences of its architects.

The preamble being part of the Constitution is discussed several times in the Supreme Court. It can be understood
by reading the following two cases.
Berubari Case: It was used as a reference under Article 143(1) of the Constitution which was on the
implementation of the Indo-Pakistan Agreement related to the Berubari Union and in exchanging the enclaves
which were decided for consideration by the bench consisting of eight judges. Through the Berubari case, the
Court stated that the ‘Preamble is the key to opening the mind of the makers’ but it cannot be considered as
part of the Constitution. Therefore, it is not enforceable in a court of law.
Kesavananda Bharati Case: In this case, for the first time, a bench of 13 judges was assembled to hear a writ
petition. The Court held that The Preamble of the Constitution will now be considered as the part of the
Constitution. The Preamble is not the supreme power or source of any restriction or prohibition but it plays an
important role in the interpretation of statutes and provisions of the Constitution. So, it can be concluded that the
preamble is part of the introductory part of the Constitution.
In the 1995 case of Union Government Vs LIC of India also, the Supreme Court once again held that Preamble is
an integral part of the Constitution but is not directly enforceable in a court of justice in India.
42nd Amendment Act, 1976: After the judgment of the Kesavananda Bharati case, it was accepted that the
preamble is part of the Constitution. As a part of the Constitution, the preamble can be amended under  Article
368 of the Constitution, but the basic structure of the preamble cannot be amended.
As of now, the preamble is only amended once through the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. The term ‘Socialist’,
‘Secular’, and ‘Integrity’ were added to the preamble through the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976. ‘Socialist’ and
‘Secular’ were added between ‘Sovereign’ and ‘Democratic’. ‘Unity of the Nation’ was changed to ‘Unity and
Integrity of the Nation’.

5. Can Preamble be amended? - explain. [8]

Answer- This question arose for the first time before the supreme court in the historic case Kesavananda Bharti v.
State of Kerala. In that case, the Attorney-General argued that by virtue of the amending power in article 368 even
the preamble can be amended. Since the preamble is part of the constitution. But it is subject to the conditions that
the basic features in the preamble cannot be amended. The court said that the foundation of our constitution is
based upon the basic elements mentioned in the preamble. If any of these elements are removed the structure will
not survive and it will not be the same constitution or it cannot maintain its identity. No one can suggest that the
basic words and expressions are ambiguous in any manner. 42nd amendment 1976 has inserted three new words in
the preamble i.e, Secularism, Socialism, and integrity. These concepts were already implicit in the constitution. The
amendment merely spells out clearly these concepts in the preamble. Secularism means a state which does not
recognize any religion as a state religion. It treats all religions equally. Although it was already mentioned as liberty
of belief in the preamble itself as well as in articles 25-28 as a fundamental right of practice any religion. Socialism
is basically govt. Ownership of property. Although, which were mentioned as economic justice in the preamble and
in DPSP as social and economic liberties. Integrity means putting an end to separatist tendencies and making
people feel that every part of India is their home. Although, it was already mentioned in article 1 as “India shall be a
union of states. Also, article 19, imposes restrictions on the freedom of a person if that very freedom endangers the
integrity and sovereignty of the state.
 6. How far is the Preamble useful in interpreting the Constitution? [6] {What purpose does the
preamble serve? [6]} (utility)

Answer- The Preamble is the introduction of the Indian constitution. It not only states the Constitution’s goals but
also identifies the source of the Constitution’s power which is “ we the people of India”. Although, in Berubari’s
case the supreme court held that the preamble was not a part of the constitution and therefore it could never be
regarded as a source of any substantive power. But, in Kesavananda Bharti’s case, the supreme court held that the
preamble of our constitution is of extreme importance and the constitution should be read and interpreted in the
light of the noble vision expressed in the preamble.

(i) The Preamble indicates that the validity behind the constitution is from the people of the country
itself. It reflects the Democratic, sovereign, and secular character of the country.
(ii) Indian Preamble nurtures the objectives set out within the scope of the constitution. It sets out
clear objectives and goals for all classes of people who strive to achieve equal status
(iii) A sovereign country is not dependable on external powers or political influence. a sovereign nation
is free from all ties and independent to take decisions on its own for the country’s benefit
(iv) To preach socialism, a country should provide social, economic, and political justice to its citizens.
In the words of the Preamble, equality of status and opportunity for the citizens
(v) Every civilization has the right to worship their faith and beliefs, and the preamble indicates that
faith and beliefs invite a way to a more secular environment in the country
(vi) The Preamble reflects the democratic nature of the country. A country where the government is
defined by the people, people, and people! Republic signifies that the elected head or
representative of the country will always be elected and appointed as a king or a monarch. Every
individual will get a fair chance to be elected as the head of the nation

7. Do you think that India is a secular state? Give reasons for your answer. [10]

Answer- The term secularism means the state has no religion of its own as recognised religion of the state. It treats
all religions equally. In a secular state the state regulates the relation between man and man. It is not concerned
with the relation of man with God. With the 42nd Amendment of the Constitution of India (1976), the Preamble to
the Constitution asserted that India is a “secular” nation. The meaning of a secular state is that it does not prioritize
any one religion for the country and its people. This objective of the Indian constitution was introduced to ensure
the maintenance of peace among different communities. It ensures the development and unity of various
communities and religions. Articles 25 to 28 of the Indian constitution ensure freedom of religion and prohibit any
discrimination on the ground of religion. It is one of the aims and objectives of the salient features of the Indian
constitution, and it was added to make clear that religion has no place in the matters of the state. Secularism in
India means equal treatment of all religions by the state. India adopted secularity in a different concept compared
to other nations. In western nations, the Secularity of state means the state and religion are two different things
and do not interfere. But India is one of the first countries to integrate itself with Secularism. India is a Secular state
because, our constitution allows it:

The word ‘secular’ was incorporated in the Preamble of our constitution by the 42nd amendment of 1976. It means
there is no official religion of the state

Freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion: Article 25 of our constitution provides people with the
freedom to profess, practice and propagate any religion. People are allowed to practice their religion and carry
religious symbols unless it harms the unity and sovereignty of the country
Freedom in attending religious instruction in educational institutions: The state-funded institutions cannot ask their
students to follow any religion. It is not mandatory to attend religious instruction in any educational institutions
aided by the state under Article 28

Prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion: Our constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds of
religion by any other religion, person, or the State itself

Allows the state to intervene in matters of religion: The state can intervene if it feels that there is discrimination in
the name of religion. For example, Sikhs are to carry a dagger as the symbol of valour in their religion. But they are
not allowed for security issues. Triple talaq was banned, considering it discriminatory towards women. Sati was
banned, considering it inhumane. In this matter, India stands different from many nations as it does not consider
the state and religion to be separated. It is tolerant as well as steps in when it is necessary.

Ambedkar once said that it does not mean that the state shall not consider the religious sentiments of the people.
A secular state means that the government should not have the power to impose any particular religion on the
remaining people. That is the only limitation that the constitution recognizes.
People of India are free to celebrate their festivals equally. Our constitution provides the right to follow, practice or
promote any religion. But, at the same time, the state can intervene and protect our fundamental rights if it deems
it necessary. Being home to many religions, India is a Secular state and a model to other nations, spreading unity
among different cultures. India is also the largest full-fledged secular democracy.

B. Directive Principles: Its relation with Fundamental Rights.

1. Discuss the nature, utility, and significance of the 'Directive Principles of State Policy'. [12] { What
do you understand by Directive Principles of State Policy?}

Answer- The Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV, Article 36 to Article 51 of the
Indian constitution set out the aims and objectives to be taken up by the states in the governance
of the country. This novel feature of the constitution is borrowed from the Irish Constitution which
had copied from the Spanish constitution. The Directive Principles lay down certain economic and
social policies to be pursued by the various Governments in India. i.e, DPSP are the ideals which the
union and state government must keep in mind while they formulate policy or pass a law. DPSP
imposes certain obligations on the state to take positive action in certain directions in order to
promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy. The utility of DPSP can be
understood in the words of the following:-

Sri G.N. Joshi- “DPSPs constitute a very comprehensive political, social, and economic program for
a modern democratic state.”
MC Chagla- Former CJI, “ if all these principles are fully carried out, our country would indeed be a
heaven on earth. India would then be not only a democracy in a political sense but also a welfare
state looking after the welfare of its citizens.”
B.R. Ambedkar- DPSP talks about “economic democracy as distinguished from political
democracy.”
Grandville Austin- DPSP Is The “conscience of the constitution” aimed at furthering the goals of
the social revolution.
B.N. Rau- the constitutional advisor to the constituent assembly, advised that DPSP provides moral
precepts for the authorities of the state. They have at least an educative value.
Article 37 states that DPSPs are not enforceable in the courts but at the same time, it defines DPSPs
as a duty of the state. Therefore, by the virtue of this Article, no provision of this part can be made
enforceable in a court of law thus these principles cannot be used against the central government
or the state government. This non-justiciability of DPSPs make the state government or the
central government immune from any action against them for not following these directives.
 2. Establish the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of
State Policy highlighting the decisions of the Supreme Court.
Answer- The Relationship between Part III and Part IV is the one that is not a novice one and was discussed by the
Constitutional Advisor Sir B.N. Rau who advocated the idea that the right of an individual on the basis of their
nature can be divided into Justiciable Rights, Non-justiciable Rights. The list of Justiciable Rights was engulfed in
Part–III while the non-justiciable one became the member of Part–IV of the Constitution. At times and again these
Directive Principles are used by the Judiciary to determine the constitutional validity of any legislation when they
are found to be in conflict with the Fundamental Rights or Part–III of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled out
that the Directive Principles could not supersede a Fundamental Right present in Part III of the Constitution.
However, the position of the same became clear when the Supreme Court took a view in the following cases;
Case 1:  The State of Madras V.  Srimathi Champakam Dorairajan 1951.
In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that since Fundamental Rights are enforceable and Directive Principles are
not, so the Fundamental Rights would prevail over the latter and have to run as a subsidiary to the Fundamental
Rights. The parliament responded by amending and modifying various FRs which were coming in conflict with
DPSPs.
Case 2: Kerala Education Bill (1957): Doctrine of Harmonious Construction
Supreme Court in the Re Kerala Education Bill(1957) had propounded the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction to
avoid a situation of conflict while enforcing DPSPs and the Fundamental Rights. As per this doctrine, the court held
that there is no inherent conflict between FRs and DPSPs, and the courts while interpreting a law should attempt to
give effect to both as far as possible i. e. should try to harmonize the two as far as possible. The court further said
that where two interpretation of the law is possible, and one interpretation validates the law while the other
interpretation makes the law unconstitutional and void, then the first interpretation which validates the law should
be adopted. But if only one interpretation is possible which leads to conflict between DPSPs and FRs, the court has
no option but to implement FRs in preference to DPSPs.
Case 3: I.C. Golaknath V. State of Punjab 1967.
whereby the Supreme Court held that the Fundamental Rights present in Part III of the Constitution are sacrosanct
and thereby cannot be amended for implementation of the Directive Principles of State Policy. The parliament
responded again by bringing the 25th Amendment Act of the constitution which inserted Article 31C in Part III.
Article 31 C contained two provisions: a. If a law is made to give effect to DPSPs in Article 39(b) and Article 39(c) and
in the process, the law violates Article 14, Article 19, or Article 31, then the law should not be declared as
unconstitutional and void merely on this ground. Any such law which contains the declaration that it is to give
effect to DPSPs in Article 39(b) and Article(c) shall not be questioned in a court of law.
Case 4: Kesavananda Bharathi Case (1973)
The above amendment was challenged in the Kesavananda Bharati Case(1973). Court Verdict that the  Parliament
can amend any part of Constitution, but could not destroy Basic Structure of the Constitution. The second clause of
Article 31C was as declared as unconstitutional and void as it was against the Basic Structure of the Constitution
propounded in this case itself. However, the SC upheld the first provision of Article 31C. The court also held that the
power of Judicial review cannot be taken out by Parliament. Parliament brought the 42nd Amendment Act in 1976,
which extended the scope of the above first provision of Article 31C by including within its purview  any law to
implement any of the DPSPs specified in Part IV of the constitutional and not merely Article 39 (b) or (c).
Case 5: Minerva Mill Case (1980)
Court Verdict that A law under Article 31C would be protected only if it is made to implement directives in article
39b and 39 c and not any other DPSPs. The extension to all DPSPs was declared as unconstitutional and void by the
SC in the Minerva Mills Case(1980).
So, if there is a conflict between FR and DPSP, which should prevail? The present order of precedence is as FR
except 14 and 19, DPSP 39(b) and 39(c), FR 14 and 19, DPSP except 39(b) and 39(c). This means that DPSP 39B and
39C have been given precedence over Fundamental Right 14 (Right to Equality) and Fundamental Right 19
(Freedom of Speech and Expression). Today, we can manifestly observe that Part III at times has to necessarily be
interpreted in the light of the Directive Principles and the co-dependence and liaison between the two are
increasing day by day. Conclusively, it can be clearly inferred from the judgments as mentioned above that the
approach of our judicial system towards Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles has been an integrative one,
and time and again, the judiciary in its judgment has employed the principle of Harmonious Construction.
 3. Discuss the validity and significance of the Directive Principles of State Policy{non-
Justiciable}.
Answer- Many times the question arises that whether an individual can sue the state government or the central
government for not following the directive principles enumerated in Part IV. The answer to this question is
negative. The reason for the same lies in Article 37 which states that the provisions contained in this Part shall not
be enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance
of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws . Therefore by the virtue
of this Article no provision of this part can be made enforceable in the court of law thus these principles cannot be
used against the central government or the state government. This non-justiciability of DPSPs make the state
government or the central government immune from any action against them for not following these directives.
Another question arises that whether the Supreme Court or High Court can issue the writ of mandamus if the state
does not follow the directive principles. The literal meaning of mandamus is “to command.” It is a writ which is
issued to any person or authority who has been prescribed a duty by the law. This writ compels the authority to do
its duty. The Writ of mandamus is generally issued in two situations. One is when a person files a writ petition or
when the Court issues it Suo moto i.e. own motion. As per Constitutional Principles, a Court is not authorized to
issue the writ of mandamus to the state when the Directive Principles are not followed because the Directive
Principle is a yardstick in the hand of people to check the performance of government and is not available for the
courts. But the Court can take Suo moto action when the matter is of utmost public importance and affect the large
interest of the public. Fundamental Rights are the legal obligation of the state to respect, whereas the DPSPs are
the moral obligation of the state to follow. Article 38 lay down the broad ideals which a state should strive to
achieve. Many of these Directive Principles have become enforceable by becoming a law. Some of the DPSPs have
widened the scope of Fundamental Rights.

4. Write a note on 'Uniform Civil Code, Free Legal Aid, Protection of Interest of Minorities.
{Discuss any 2 Directive Principles under Part IV of the Constitution, citing case laws
relating to them.}
Answer- UCC
Uniform Civil Code resonates with one country one rule, to be applied to all religious communities. The term,
‘Uniform Civil Code’ is explicitly mentioned in Part 4, Article 44 of the Indian Constitution. Article 44 says, “The
State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.”  A Uniform
Civil Code means that all sections of the society irrespective of their religion shall be treated equally according to a
national civil code, which shall be applicable to all uniformly. They cover areas like- Marriage, divorce,
maintenance, inheritance, adoption, and succession of the property. It is based on the premise that there is no
connection between religion and law in modern civilization. The Lex Loci Report of October 1840- Stressed the
importance and necessity of uniformity in the codification of Indian law, relating to crimes, evidence, and contract.
But it also recommended that the personal laws of Hindus and Muslims should be kept outside such codification.
The Queen’s 1859 Proclamation- It promised absolute non-interference in religious matters. So, while criminal laws
were codified and became common for the whole country, personal laws continue to be governed by separate
codes for different communities. During the drafting of the constitution, prominent leaders like Jawaharlal Nehru
and Dr. B.R Ambedkar pushed for a uniform civil code. However, they included the UCC in the Directive Principles
of State Policy (DPSP, Article 44) mainly due to opposition from religious fundamentalists and a lack of awareness
among the masses during the time. Some of the reforms of this period were:-
The Hindu code bill -The bill was drafted by Dr. R Ambedkar to reform Hindu laws, which legalized divorce,
opposed polygamy, and gave rights of inheritance to daughters. Amidst intense opposition to the code, a diluted
version was passed via four different laws. Succession Act the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, originally did not give
daughters inheritance rights in ancestral property. They could only ask for a right to sustenance from a joint Hindu
family. But this disparity was removed by an amendment to the Act on September 9, 2005 , The Hindu Marriage
Act, Minority and Guardianship Act, Adoptions and Maintenance Act, and Special Marriage Act. It was enacted in
1954 which provided for civil marriages outside of any religious personal law. Judicial interventions;
Shah Bano case (1985):- A 73-year-old woman called Shah Bano was divorced by her husband using triple talaq
(saying “I divorce thee” three times) and was denied maintenance. She approached the courts and the District
Court and the High Court ruled in her favour. This led to her husband appealing to the Supreme Court saying that
he had fulfilled all his obligations under Islamic law. The Supreme Court ruled in her favour in 1985 under the
“maintenance of wives, children and parents” provision (Section 125) of the All-India Criminal Code, which applied
to all citizens irrespective of religion. Further, it recommended that a uniform civil code be set up. Daniel Latifi
Case:- Muslim Women’s Act (MWA) was challenged on the grounds that it violated the right to equality under
Articles 14& 15 as well as the right to life under Article 21. The Supreme Court while holding the law as
constitutional, harmonised it with section 125 of CrPC and held that the amount received by a wife during the iddat
period should be large enough to maintain her during iddat as well as provide for her future. Thus under the law of
the land, a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to the provision of maintenance for a lifetime or until she is
remarried.
Free Legal Aid
Free legal aid is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed to all the citizens of the country. Article 12 of the
constitution of India states, “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to
procedure established by law”.  Furthermore, the principle of free legal aid is stretched in the Indian constitution in
the directive principles of the state policy contained in part IV Article 39-A, it has been directed to the state to
ensure that the mechanism of the legal system promotes justice based on equal opportunities and shall
compulsorily provide free legal aid to economically backward classes by suitable legislation or schemes or in any
other way. For the provisions of legal aid, the government of India had taken massive steps such as setting up legal
aid boards, societies, law commissions, and law departments and in the year 1980, the committee for
implementing legal aid schemes (CILAS) was constituted under the chairmanship of Honourable Justice P.N.
Bhagwati to regulate legal aid program all over the country. Another step was in form of Lok Adalat which is
established as a supplementary forum to the litigation in the judicial dispenses system of India. The legal services
authorities act, 1987, and is headed by the national legal services authority (NALSA). in the case of Air India
Statutory Corporation V. United Labour Union, in which the supreme court observed that ARTICLE 39A furnishes a
beacon light that justice is done based on equal opportunity and no one is denied justice because of economic or
other disabilities. The importance of legal aid is not only lightened up in the Indian constitution but also under
section 304(1) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 it is stated that in a trial before the sessions judge if the
accused has no sufficient means to engage a plea, the court should assign a pleader for his defense at the expense
of the state. Khatri V. State of Bihar, the supreme court held that the state is constitutionally bound to provide legal
assistance by hiring a lawyer to an accused person not only at the trial stage but also when they are first produced
before the magistrate or remanded time and again and such a right shall not be denied on the ground of financial
or administrative inability or that the accused did not ask for Magistrates state and sessions judges have the most
responsibility to inform the accused of his rights.

C. Fundamental Duties.

1. Discuss the Fundamental Duties as stated in the Constitution of India. Establish the reference of
Fundamental Duties. [16]

Answer- In the Indian constitution, through the 42nd Amendment Act 1976, the fundamental duties of citizens
were listed. Article 51 ‘A’ embodied in Part IV of the Constitution deals with Fundamental Duties. In India, January 6
is celebrated as “Fundamental Duties Day”. There was no mention of Fundamental Duties in the original
Constitution of India. In 1976, the Indira Gandhi government constituted a committee under the chairmanship of
Sardar Swaran Singh. This committee recommended eight Fundamental Duties, but the government added ten
duties. But three suggestions of these committees were not considered by the government, Parliament should be
given the power to make laws for the implementation of these duties and to punish for the violation, Such a law
will be valid even if it violates the fundamental right, The duty to pay taxes should also be a fundamental duty of
the Indian people.
These Fundamental Duties were mainly inspired by the body of the former Soviet Union. Total 11 essential duties in
India. The following is a list of 11 fundamental duties – 
i.Abide by the Constitution and respect the national flag & National Anthem
 ii.Follow the ideals of the freedom struggle
iii.Protect the sovereignty & integrity of India
iv.Defend the country and render national services when called upon
v.Developing the spirit of common brotherhood
vi.Preserve the composite culture of the country
vii.Preserve the natural environment
viii.Develop scientific temper and humanity
ix.Safeguard public property and avoid violence
x.Strive for excellence in all spheres of life.
xi.Duty of all parents/guardians to send their children in the age group of 6-14 years to school. (86th
amendment act 2002)
The purpose behind the creation of Fundamental Duties is that every citizen should realise that, the national
interest should be ahead of every action and goal. 
The Court cannot enforce fundamental Duty. Meaning is unenforceable. There is no mention of any law in the
constitution for the direct enforcement of these duties or the redressal of their violation. But if any law is made
keeping in mind Article 14 and Article 19, it will be honourable.
2.How is 'Fundamental Duties' related to 'Fundamental Rights'? [8]

Answer- Fundamental rights and duties are an important part of the Indian constitution. There are six
fundamental rights that include the right to equality, the right to freedom, the right against exploitation, the right
to freedom of religion, cultural and educational rights, and the right to constitutional remedies. The fundamental
rights are given in articles 12 – 35 of the Indian constitution. Fundamental duties are the responsibility of the Indian
citizens towards the country. There are 11 fundamental duties given in article 51(A) of the constitution. Both
Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties are important as they complement each other. There can be no
demand for rights if the duties bestowed are neglected. Even though only Fundamental Rights are enforceable and
justiciable, Fundamental Duties are equally important. By performing moral obligations, we make efforts to create a
better society, as was envisioned by the Constitution makers. These duties were not made justiciable because not
everyone would grasp this concept and understand what these terms mean. India having its majority population
uneducated played a huge role in this decision. But people like us who are capable of understanding these should
follow and promote these ideas for the betterment of this country. The relationship between Fundamental Rights
and Duties is that for every right there is a corresponding duty. One’s rights are another’s duty. If people do not
perform their duties, the rights of others would be affected. Fundamental Rights are basic human rights given to
citizens of a country. They are justiciable. Fundamental Duties are moral obligations of the citizens towards the
country. These duties are not justiciable.
3. Discuss the object, importance, and enforcement of Fundamental Duties. [8]
Answer- Features of Fundamental Duties
The fundamental duties contained both the moral as well as civic duties. For example, cherishing noble ideals from
freedom struggle is on moral lead however respecting the constitution, national flag and national emblem is on
civic lead.
Though some of the fundamental rights are extended to foreigners as well as aliens but fundamental duties are
only confined to Indian citizenship and do extend towards foreigners.
Like Directive Principles, Fundamental Duties are also non-enforceable in nature. The government cannot enforce
legal sanctions for their violation.
The duties are essentially taken from Indian tradition, mythology, religions, and practices. Essentially these were
the duties that are the codification of tasks integral to the Indian way of life.
Significance of Fundamental Duties
It serves as a constant reminder to the citizens that while enjoying their rights, the citizens should be aware of their
duties to their nation and to other citizens.
These serve as a warning to the people against the anti-social activities that disrespect the nation like burning the
flag, destroying public property, or disturbing public peace.
These help in the promotion of a sense of discipline and commitment towards the nation. They help in realising
national goals by the active participation of citizens rather than mere spectators.
It helps the Court in determining the constitutionality of the law. For instance, any law passed by the legislatures,
when taken to Court for constitutional validity of the law, if it is giving force to any Fundamental Duty, then such
law would be taken as reasonable.
They can be enforced by the law; the parliament has the right to impose any type of penalty or punishment for
violating any of the Fundamental Duties.
IN THE WORDS OF LATE PRIME MINISTER INDIRA GANDHI, “THE MORAL VALUE OF FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES WOULD
NOT BE TO SMOOTHER RIGHTS BUT TO ESTABLISH A DEMOCRATIC BALANCE BY MAKING PEOPLE CONSCIOUS OF
THEIR DUTIES EQUALLY AS THEY ARE CONSCIOUS OF THEIR RIGHTS”.