Equality and Social Justice

Articles-14-18

Equality and Social Justice

Equality before law and Equal Protection of Laws Classification of Differential Treatments : Constitutional Validity Gender Justice Justice to Weaker Sections of Society

Article 14
The

State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India

Concept of Equality

Equality before Law Equal Protection of Laws

Equality before Law

Does not mean absolute Equality Like should be treated alike

Dr. Jennings on Equality

Equality before the law means that among equals the law should be equal and should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike. The right to sue and be sued , to prosecute and be prosecuted for the same kind of action should be same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth , social status or political influence.

Rule of Law

Absence of Arbitrary Power : Absolute

supremacy of law. Punishment only for breach of law and nothing else. Equality Before Law : All classes subject to same ordinary law administered by ordinary courts.

Constitution is the result of ordinary law of the land:

Equal Protection of Laws

All persons under similar circumstances shall be treated alike

Exclusion of Article 14

Under International Law, foreign sovereign and ambassadors enjoy full immunity from any judicial process. Immunity also available to enemy claims for acts of war. Article 36 lays down that the President and the governors are exempted from any criminal proceeding during the tenure of their office.

Art. 359 (1) lays down that where a proclamation of emergency is in operation the President may, by order, declare that the right to move any court for the enforcement of such rights conferred by Part III (except Arts.20 and 21) shall remain suspended.

New Concept of Equality

E.P. Royappa V. State of Tamil Nadu (AIR 1974 SC 555) Justice Krishna Iyer: New Concept of Equality: Protection against arbitrariness

Justice Krishna Iyer on Equality

Equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and dimensions and it cannot be cribbed, cabined and confined within traditional and doctrinal limits. From a positivist point of view, equality is antithetic to arbitrariness. In fact equality and arbitrariness are sworn enemies; one belong to the rule of law in a republic while the other to the whim and caprice of an absolute monarch. Where an act is arbitrary, it is implicit in it that it is unequal both according to political logic and constitutional law and therefore violative of Article 14.

Case Laws

K.A.Abbas V. Union of India (AIR 1971 SC 481) E.P. Royappa V. State of Tamil Nadu (AIR 1974 SC 555) Ajay Hasia V. Khalid Mujib (AIR 191 SC 487) Air India V. Nargesh Mirza (AIR 1981 SCC 663) (to be referred for Gender Justice)

Case Law

Indian Council of Legal Aid & Advice V. Bar Council of India (1995) 1 SCC 732 BALCO Employees Union (Regd ) V. UOI AIR 2002 SC 350

Test of Reasonable Classification

Classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group The differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the Act.

Classification of Differential Treatments : Constitutional Validity

Cases wherein classification madeConstitutional validity challenged R.K. Ghosh V. J.G. Rajput (1996) 6 SCC 744 Sunil Jaitley v State of Haryana (1984) 4 SCC 296 Mithu V. State of Punjab AIR 1983 SC 473 K.A.Abbas V. UOI AIR 1971 AC 481

R.K. Ghosh V. J.G. Rajput

Facts: Respondent , and employee of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporationchallenged his suspension Mr. B.L.Shethna- argued his case-obtained stay Mr. B.L.Shethna- appointed judge of High Court of Gujarat. 1993, Respondent served with another charge sheet

Charge sheet not connected with earlier dispute Petition filed. Contention: Said CS be stayed. Appellant Municipal Corporation be punished for Contempt of Court Two earlier orders be restored.

Petition was to be heard by- R.A. Mehta & B.L. Shethna Appellant (AMC)- objected. Contention- Justice Shethna earlier had appeared as an advocate of Respondent in 1988. Despite this HC- passed an order SC- Held: Action of Judge- violates Rule of Law- Quashed order of HC

Validity of S. 303 of IPC: Challenged

S. 303: states that if a person under a sentence of life imprisonment in jail commit murder he must be awarded sentence of death. S.302: states, if a person commits murder he may be awarded either sentence of death or sentence of life imprisonment.

Mithu V. State of Punjab

Facts: Different treatment persons who commit murders whilst in under sentence (Case 1)and by persons while they are not under sentence.( Case 2) Distinction made for awarding death sentence Sentence of Death mandatory in case 1 Discretionary- in Case 2

Validity of S. 303 of IPC: Challenged

Contention : which sentence be granted : Discretion of the Courts. Judicial Discretion Available under S.302 But unavailable to a life convict u/S 303

Validity of S. 303 of IPC: Challenged

SC: Struck down S. 303 as unconstitutional Ground: Classification between persons not based on rational principal.

Validity of Cinematograph Act, 1952 Challenged

K.A. Abbas V. UOI Fact: Cinematograph Act, 1952 Challenged Films classified into categories U: Unrestricted Exhibition A: Exhibition only for Adults

Grounds of Challenge

Motion picture-form of expression Therefore , entitled to equal treatment with other forms of expression Other forms not subjected to prior restraint Therefore, different treatment to filmsamounts to invalid classification

SC on Validity of Cinematograph Act

Upheld Different treatment necessary Reasons: Motion picture- raises instant emotions Stirs up emotions more deeply than other product of art

Sunil Jaitley V.State of Haryana

Facts : 25 seats reserved for admission to MBBS and BDS students coming from rural areas Those who studied from 1-8 in rural areas

SC

Held: violative of Art.14 Reasons: Arbitrary and irrational No rational to the object achieved Same Government Same Education course prescribed, equipment and grants- including qualification of staff imparting education Hence , similarly placed. Hence, Classification- Unconstitutional.