ARTICLE 14

Introduction

• Discrimination and other evils still exist in our land. This taboo even affected the author of our Constitution. Even today, there are still some places where discrimination against people is practiced on the basis of factors such as religion, race, sex, caste, and country of origin.
• Knowing the situation in India, our Constitution’s authors incorporated Article 14 as a fundamental right to all people, including those who are not citizens of our country.

What does Article Fourteen say?

• In essence, it declares that “The State shall not deny to any person within the territory of India, equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws.”
• The fundamental tenet of liberalism is that all citizens should be treated equally, and Article 14 guarantees this for all of our residents. Any person’s freedom is inversely proportional to the level of equality they have in society.

Equality before the law

• No one, regardless of rank or position, is above the law under this English principle, which guarantees that no one has special advantages in their favor and that everyone is equally subject to the general law of the land. This is comparable to the second consequence of the Dicean concept of the Rule of Law in Britain. This general rule does have a few outliers, though. For instance, Article 361 exempts foreign ambassadors from the nation’s legal processes while still providing some protection for public officials and judges. Under this clause, certain special interest groups and groups have also been granted immunity.

Equal protection of law

• Similar language on equal protection of the laws is included in the 14th amendment to the American constitution, which declares that everyone is subject to the same laws that apply to everyone in the same circumstances. All it means is that everyone will be treated equally in terms of the rights granted and obligations imposed by the law.
• Meaning: There should be no prejudice between people, and the law should always be implemented equally.
• The right to equal protection under the law is guaranteed to “every person,” which includes any business, organization, or collection of persons, according to Article 14 of the Constitution. Citizens and non-citizens, natural or legal persons are all protected by Article 14.
• Examples of the Rule
• The aforementioned equality rule, meanwhile, has a lot of exceptions, therefore it is not a universal standard. For instance, the concept of “equality before the law” does not imply that the rights of private individuals are the same as those of public officials. So, the only person with the power to make an arrest is a police officer.
• The rule of law does not forbid the application of specific laws to particular categories of people. Thus, persons who serve in the armed forces are subject to military restrictions.
• The statutes give ministers and other executive authorities a great deal of latitude. A Minister may be granted discretionary authority under the law “to act as he considers proper” or “if he is satisfied.”
• Just a few people of society whose occupations are governed by certain laws are lawyers, doctors, nurses, soldiers, and police.

Landmark cases regarding Article 14

State of Rajasthan v. Vishaka, 1997

• In a historic ruling, the court determined that sexual harassment of women at work violates their fundamental rights, which are protected by Articles 14, 19, and 21. The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, was passed as a result.

Shayara Bano v. UOI (2017)

• The SC’s five-judge panel ruled that the instant Triple Talaq practice was illegal. It was noted that this went against the constitution’s provision of equality for Muslim women.

State of Kerala v. Indian Young Lawyers Association (2018)

• By a 4:1 margin, the SC upheld the Sabrimala temple’s tradition of forbidding women in their “menstruating years” from accessing the temple grounds.

Navtej Singh Jauhar v. UOI.(2018)

• The historic ruling that invalidated Section 377 of the IPC for criminalizing same-sex relationships between consenting people. It claimed that it violated the rights of the LGBTQ community.