hi guys

this one is out for all law people study

As early as 1215 the English people extracted an assurance from King John for respect of their ancient liberties. The Magna-Carta is an evidence of their success which is a written document. Thereafter the King had to accede many rights to his subjects. In 1689 the bill of rights was enacted consolidating all basic right and liberties of English Citizens.
In

1789,

France

ordained

the

Declaration

of

Rights

of

Man

and

Citizen

which

declared

the

inalienable

sacred

rights

of

every

man.

In

1789,

the

American

Congress

also

incorporated

the

Bill

of

Rights

into

its

constitution.

The framers of the Indian Constitution, incorporated the Bill of Rights as a background for a whole chapter, that elaborately states that certain rights are inviolable under all conditions and cannot be interfered with by the legislature of the country. They are Fundamental Rights which are in accordance with the idea of a modern democratic thought, to preserve the condition of free right.
Definition
Fundamental Rights are assurance the every citizens has the right to liberties which are basic in nature for the harmonious growth of an individual and society. They are inviolable and cannot be interfered with through an amendment by the legislature of the country. Every law hence made should be in accordance with Fundamental Rights of every citizens, any law made that is violating fundamental is declared null and unenforceable. The vision of the framers
was to unite the people of the country, and is guaranteed to all irrespective of religion, caste, creed, place of birth, race or place of birth. There are seven fundamental rights which are right to equality, right to freedom, right to life, right to constitutional remedies, cultural and educational rights, right to life, right to exploitation, right to freedom of religion.
West

Virginia

State

Board

of

Education

vs.

Barnette

The action of a state made it compulsory for children to salute the flag of America and recite the allegiance pledge failing which could result in expulsion. A group of Jehovahs witness argued that forced flag salute conflicts with their religious beliefs against idol worship and engraved images which is thereby a violation of their first amendments rights. The Court that the compulsory rule violated the first and fourteenth amendment by compelling students.
The

court

reasoned

that

Chairman

authority

is

to

of

be

controlled

by

Railway

public

opinion

and

Board

not

public

vs.

opinion

by

authority.

Chandrima

Das,

Chandrima Das an advocate of the Calcutta High Court filed a petition against several members of the Railways including the Chairman of the Railways Board, demanding compensation for Smt. Hannuffa Khatun who was gangraped by employees of the railways. She was awarded a compensation of Rupees 10 lacs by the High Court, this was challenged by the appellants under the several grounds including the fact that there was no violation of
fundamental rights. But the court observed that rape was in fact the most heinous of crimes as it includes an emotional crises and a psychological destruction of the victim. It also held that certain rights are applicable to every person in the country which includes citizens and foreign nationals who come here for tourist or other purposes which is in accordance with Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The supreme court upheld the decision of the High
Court

and

ordered

compensation

Need

to

be

given

for

to

the

victim.

Fundamental

Rights

Fundamental Rights are essential for preserving and maintaining the union between a state and its citizens. It guarantees to the citizens certain inviolable personal liberties that cannot be meddled with by the state. There is a need for such fundamental to protect them from the actions of the state. The reasons for the need of fundamental rights are as follows:
1.Rule

of

Law-This

2.

Consequence

3.

Quantification

of
of

states
long

that

the

freedom

Freedom-This

is

law

guaranteeing

struggle-The
a

measurement

fundamental

citizens
of

of

how

the
free

the

rights
country
citizens

is

supreme

had
of

been
the

and

every

living

in

country

truly

government
subjugation

are.

For

for

example

body
a

must
very

people

adhere
long

living

in

strictly
time

the

with

on
Gulf

the
countries

them.
whims
also

This
of
have

is
the

to

protect
British

fundamental

the
Govt.

rights

but

citizens
These
these

from
rights

rights

any

transgressions

renewed
don't

extend

the
upto

on

beliefs
freedom

the

part

of

the

of

religion.

of
people
The

the

government.

to
citizens

hope.

This

of

China

No

person
brings

don't

or

body

is

sense

of

have

freedom

of

above
fulfilment

right

these

rights.

and

satisfaction.

expression

and

speech.

nt. Thereafter the King had to accede many rights to his subjects. In 1689 the bill of rights was enacted consolidating all basic right and liberties of English Citizens.
State

State has been defined in the Indian Constitution under Article 12. The term state includes the the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and Legislature of each of the states. It also includes all local and or other forms of authority under the control of the Government of India. They are statutory and non statutory bodies that receive financial assistance from the government and have deep pervasive of control of government functions. There
are certain essential conditions that need to met before pronouncing a state agency or instrument as a state. They are 1. Financial resources of the state being the chief source of funding. 2. Functional nature should be one that is to be carried out by the government. 3. Plenary control residing with the government. 4. Prior history of the same activity having been carried on by government and made over to the new body. 5. Some element of authority or
command.

l of Rights into its constitution.

Judiciary

as

State

It is not explicitly mentioned in Article 12 of the Constitution whether judiciary is considered a part of the state. Hence, there is some reason for debate. It is well established that for non judicial functions, the judiciary is to be considered a state. But for Judicial decisions which have reached their finality could be challenged through a writ on the basis of violation of fundamental rights is open to debate.
Doctrine of Ejusdem Generis : The literal meaning of this is of the same kind. It is used as a method of statutory interpretation. It is applicable when a general term of wide scope is followed by specific terms with restrictive interpretation. There are certain conditions that need to be fulfilled in order for this doctrine to be valid. 1. The specific term should be followed by the general term. 2. The specific terms should fall under a class or group. 3. The category
hence

formed

should

not

be

exhaustive

and

should

not

be

against

the

legislative

intent

while

using

this

principle.

cannot be interfered with by the legislature of the country. They are Fundamental Rights which are in accordance with the idea of a modern democratic thought, to preserve the condition of free right.
Rajasthan

State

Electricity

Board

vs.

Mohanlal

The board argued that it was a corporate body and could not be put under the ambit of Article 12 under the grounds that under the doctrine of ejusdem generis, the common class or genus includes only those bodies carrying out governmental functions. The court rejected this argument under the grounds that there is no common class or genus running through article 12. Justice Shah concurred in the Judgement but differed on the reasoning, he believed that any
authority carrying sovereign powers of a state. The Board has invested in controlling electrical undertakings thereby fixing tariffs, issue directions for maximum economy and efficiency.

ot be interfered with through an amendment by the legislature of the country. Every law hence made should be in accordance with Fundamental Rights of every citizens, any law made that is violating fundamental i

xploitation, right to freedom of religion.

ued that forced flag salute conflicts with their religious beliefs against idol worship and engraved images which is thereby a violation of their first amendments rights. The Court that the compulsory rule violated the f

n for Smt. Hannuffa Khatun who was gangraped by employees of the railways. She was awarded a compensation of Rupees 10 lacs by the High Court, this was challenged by the appellants under the several gro

or other purposes which is in accordance with Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The supreme court upheld the decision of the High Court and ordered compensation to be given to the victim.

eddled with by the state. There is a need for such fundamental to protect them from the actions of the state. The reasons for the need of fundamental rights are as follows:

gressions on the part of the government. No person or body is above these rights.

s of the people to hope. This brings a sense of fulfilment and satisfaction.

rights don't extend upto freedom of religion. The citizens of China don't have freedom of right expression and speech.

tates. It also includes all local and or other forms of authority under the control of the Government of India. They are statutory and non statutory bodies that receive financial assistance from the government and have
rior history of the same activity having been carried on by government and made over to the new body. 5. Some element of authority or command.

dicial functions, the judiciary is to be considered a state. But for Judicial decisions which have reached their finality could be challenged through a writ on the basis of violation of fundamental rights is open to debate

wed by specific terms with restrictive interpretation. There are certain conditions that need to be fulfilled in order for this doctrine to be valid. 1. The specific term should be followed by the general term. 2. The speci

includes only those bodies carrying out governmental functions. The court rejected this argument under the grounds that there is no common class or genus running through article 12. Justice Shah concurred in th