Skip to main content

Equality before law

 Equality before law

“The state shall not deny to any person equality before the law.


Meaning of right to equality

This means that every person, who lives within territory of India, has the equal right before the law. the meaning of this all are equal in same line. No discrimination based on religion ,race, caste, sex,and place of birth. its mean that all will be treated as equality among equal .and there will be no discrimination based on lower or higher class.


Article-14 Of Constitution Of India

The state not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within The territory of India. protection prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, Caste, sex, or place of birth. Prof. Dicey, explaining the concept of legal equality as it operated in England, said: “with us every official, from the prime minister down to a constable or a collector of taxes, is under the same responsibility for every act done without any legal justification as any other citizen.”


The phase “ equality to the law “ find a place in all written constitutions that guarantees fundamental rights. “All citizens irrespective of birth, religion, sex, or race are equal before law ; that is to say, there Shall not be any arbitrary discrimination between one citizen or class of citizens and another.” “All citizens shall, as human persons he held equal before law.” “All inhabitants of the republic are assured equality before the laws.”


Pantanjali Sastri, c.j., has expressed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imaging a situation in which the violation of laws will not be the violation of equality before laws thus, in substance the two expression mean one and same thing.


According to Dr. Jennings said that: “Equality before the law means that equality among equals the law should be equal for all. And should be equally administered, that like should treated alike. The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and 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.”


Equal Protection Of Law

“Equal protection of law” has been given in article 14 of our Indian constitution which has been taken from section 1 of the 14th amendment act of the constitution of the united state.


Meaning of equal protection of law: here, it means that each person within the territory of India will get equal Protection of laws.


In Stephen’s college v. university of Delhiunder The court held that the expression “Equal protection of the laws is now being read as a positive Obligation on the state to ensure equal protection of laws by bringing in necessary social and economic changes so that everyone may enjoy equal protection of the laws and nobody is denied such protection. If the state leaves the existing inequalities untouched laws d by its laws, it fails in its duty of providing equal protection of its laws to all persons. State will provide equal protection to all the people of India who are citizen of India and as well as non citizen of India.


Exceptions To Rule Of Law

In the case of Indra Sawhney the right to equality is also recognized as one of basic features of Indian constitution. Article 14 applies to all person and is not limited to citizens. A corporation, which is a juristic person, is also entailed to the benefit of this article. This concept implied equality for equals and aims at striking down hostile discrimination or oppression of inequality. In the case of Ramesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, AIR 1978 SC 327 It is to be noted that aim of both the concept, ‘ Equality before law’ and ‘ Equal protection of the law’ is the equal Justice.


Underlying priniciple:-

The Principle of equality is not the uniformity of treatment to all in all respects. it only means that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in the privileges conferred and liabilities imposed by the laws. Equal law should be applied to all in the same situation, and there should be no discrimination between one person and another.


Permination & Prohibition Of Article 14

Article 14 permits classification but prohibits class legislation the equal protection of law guaranteed by article 14 does not mean that all laws must be general in character. It does not mean that the same laws should apply to all persons. It does not mean that every law must have universal application for, all person are not, by nature, attainment or circumstances in the same position. The varying need of different classes of persons often require separate treatment. From the very nature of society there should be different places and the legislature controls the policy and enacts laws in the best interest of the safety and security of the state.

Test of reasonable classification 

Article 14 forbid class legislation, it does not forbid reasonable classification of person, object and transactions by the legislature for the purpose of achieving specific ends. But classification must not be "arbitrary, artificial or evasive". It must always rest upon some real and substantive distinction bearing a just and reasonable relation to the object sought to be achieved by the legislature. 

Classification to be reasonable must fulfil the following two conditions - 

1- the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things  that are grouped together from other left out of the group 

2-  the differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the act. 

What is necessary is that there must be a nexus between the basis of classification and the object of the act which makes the classification. 


Exceptions to the equality before law - article 361 of the Constitution permits the following exception to this rule

1- The president or the governor of a state shall not be answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his office. 

2- No criminal proceedings whatsoever shall be instituted against the president or a governor in any court during his terms of office. 

3- No civil proceedings in which relief is claimed against the president or the governor of a state shall be instituted during his term of office in any court in respect of any act done by him in his personal capacity. 


Equality before law

By- SHAMBHAVI

VIP-AUTHOR
Labels:

Comments

  1. GRANT PHILLIPS LAW, PLLC16 May 2022 at 01:06

    I am attracted by the presentation of this article. This information about MCA Law Firm is really good. I really appreciate your work. It is a gainful article for us. Keep posting. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996)

     POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996) INTRODUCTION The medical profession is perhaps the noblest profession among any remaining professions in India. For a patient, the specialist resembles God. What's more, God is trustworthy. In any case, that is the patient's opinion. As a general rule, doctors are individuals. Furthermore, to fail is human. Doctors might submit a slip-up. Doctors might be careless. The care staff might be imprudent. Two demonstrations of carelessness might bring about a lot more pressing issue. It very well might be because of gross carelessness. The sky is the limit. In such a situation, it is basic to figure out who was careless, and under what conditions. For this situation, the Supreme Court separated carelessness, impulsiveness, and foolishness. An individual is supposed to be a careless individual when he/she unintentionally submits a demonstration of exclusion and disregards a positive obligation that he/she ought to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur ...
1 comment
Read more

Effects of Non-Registration

 Effects of Non-Registration The Companies Act, 2013 evidently highlights that the main essential for any organization to turn into a company is to get itself registered. A company cannot come into existence until it gets registered. But no such obligation has been imposed for firms by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. If a firm is not registered it does not cease to be called as a firm, it still exists in the eyes law. Certainly, such a big advantage is not absolute but is subjected to a lot of limitations which we will study further. Non-registration of a firm simply means that the business skips the formalities of incorporation and ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 deals with the procedure of incorporation. Likewise, the meaning of non-registration is the exact opposite of registration, meaning when a firm does not go through the procedure of incorporation or start carrying on activities without getting registered. Effects of ...
Post a Comment
Read more