Article 17; Article 18
under Part III of
Constitution of India
By:
Hitendra V.Hiremath
ARTICLE 17. ABOLITION OF UNTOUCHABILITY
 Article 17 of the Constitution of India deals with the
provision relating to Abolition of Untouchability.
 It falls under Part III of the Constitution of India were
every citizens are guaranteed with the fundamental
rights.
 Article 17 deals with Abolition of Untouchability and it
states “ ‘Untouchability’ is abolished and its practice in
any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability
arising out of ‘Untouchability’ shall be an offence
punishable in accordance with law.”
 This article enacts two declarations:
i. Firstly, it announces that ‘untouchability’ is abolished
and its practice in any form is forbidden, and
ii. Secondly, it declares that the enforcement of any
disability arising out of ‘untouchability’ shall be an
offence punishable in accordance with law.
 Most part of this article is been covered under Art.15.
Thus on the grounds of untouchability no person can
be denied access to shops, public restaurants, hotels
and places of public entertainment or the use of wells,
tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort,
maintained wholly or partly out of State funds.
 These are the major instances of the form in which
untouchability is practised in this country. All these
practices are now forbidden by the Constitution.
 For the effective enforcement of the declaration
contained in this article, the Constitution contemplates
penal laws specifying various acts which are to be
prohibited and penalised and under Article 35 the
parliament alone can make laws prescribing punishments
for the acts forbidden under Article 17.
 In 1955 Parliament, enacted Untouchability (Offences)
Act, and it prescribed punishments for various practices
which are forbidden. However it was found that the
punishments are inadequate and in 1965, a committee on
Untouchability, Economic and Educational Development
of the Scheduled Castes was set upped.
 On the recommendations made by this committee, a bill
was passed in 1976 and renamed as ‘Protection of Civil
Rights Act, 1955’.
 Significant changes were made, and offences are now
punishable up to three months.
 In State of Karnataka v. Appa Bala Ingale (AIR 1993 SC
1126), this was the first case which came before Supreme
Court under this act.
 In this case Harijan community was threatned with use
of gun to show about their social disability. Supreme
Court in this case convicted the respondents.
CONCLUSION
Though the Preamble of Constitution states that India is a
Secularistic state, Article 17 of the Constitution abolishes
‘Untouchability’ and also forbids it and is punishable
under law.
Thus social angularity of this evil of Untouchability is
tried to be abolished by the Constitution by providing a
express provision under it.
ARTICLE 18. ABOLITION OF TITLES
 Art.18 Clause (1) prohibits the conferment of titles,
Military and academic distinctions are exempted from
the prohibition. Clause (2) prohibits a citizen of India
from accepting any title from a foreign State. Clause (3)
provides that a non-citizen who holds any office of office
of profit or trust under the State shall not accept, without
the consent of the President, any title from any foreign
State. Clause (4) provides that no person citizen or non
citizen holding any office of profit or trust, shall, without
consent of the President, accept any present or
emolument or office of any kind from or under any
foreign State.
 American Constitution under Article 8 also have the
similar provision and have prohibited the persons
holding the office of trust or profit from receiving gifts in
any forms from foreign states without the permission of
the Congress.
 In Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (AIR 1996 SC
770), In 1954 the Government of India introduced four
awards namely , Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma
Bhushan and Padma Shri for exceptional and
distinguished service in any field including public
service. These awards were abolished in 1977 but were
reinstated in 1980. There validity was challenged in the
Court under Article 18 on the ground of their
inconsistency with that article.
 Court observed that it does not conflict with Article 18
and Court also noted indiscriminate conferment of these
awards without any clear guidelines and it advised that a
committee under the Prime Minister consisting among
others i.e., Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of
India or his nominee and the leader of the opposition in
consultation with the President of India should nominate
persons for these awards.
CONCLUSION
Article 18 thus abolishes the conferment of titles through
different ways. Its to be noted here that Article18 does
not, like Article 17 provide breach of any obligation will
be an offence punishable in accordance with law.

Article 17 & 18 under Constitution of India

  • 1.
    Article 17; Article18 under Part III of Constitution of India By: Hitendra V.Hiremath
  • 2.
    ARTICLE 17. ABOLITIONOF UNTOUCHABILITY  Article 17 of the Constitution of India deals with the provision relating to Abolition of Untouchability.  It falls under Part III of the Constitution of India were every citizens are guaranteed with the fundamental rights.  Article 17 deals with Abolition of Untouchability and it states “ ‘Untouchability’ is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability arising out of ‘Untouchability’ shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.”
  • 3.
     This articleenacts two declarations: i. Firstly, it announces that ‘untouchability’ is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden, and ii. Secondly, it declares that the enforcement of any disability arising out of ‘untouchability’ shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.  Most part of this article is been covered under Art.15. Thus on the grounds of untouchability no person can be denied access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment or the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort, maintained wholly or partly out of State funds.
  • 4.
     These arethe major instances of the form in which untouchability is practised in this country. All these practices are now forbidden by the Constitution.  For the effective enforcement of the declaration contained in this article, the Constitution contemplates penal laws specifying various acts which are to be prohibited and penalised and under Article 35 the parliament alone can make laws prescribing punishments for the acts forbidden under Article 17.
  • 5.
     In 1955Parliament, enacted Untouchability (Offences) Act, and it prescribed punishments for various practices which are forbidden. However it was found that the punishments are inadequate and in 1965, a committee on Untouchability, Economic and Educational Development of the Scheduled Castes was set upped.  On the recommendations made by this committee, a bill was passed in 1976 and renamed as ‘Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955’.  Significant changes were made, and offences are now punishable up to three months.
  • 6.
     In Stateof Karnataka v. Appa Bala Ingale (AIR 1993 SC 1126), this was the first case which came before Supreme Court under this act.  In this case Harijan community was threatned with use of gun to show about their social disability. Supreme Court in this case convicted the respondents.
  • 7.
    CONCLUSION Though the Preambleof Constitution states that India is a Secularistic state, Article 17 of the Constitution abolishes ‘Untouchability’ and also forbids it and is punishable under law. Thus social angularity of this evil of Untouchability is tried to be abolished by the Constitution by providing a express provision under it.
  • 8.
    ARTICLE 18. ABOLITIONOF TITLES  Art.18 Clause (1) prohibits the conferment of titles, Military and academic distinctions are exempted from the prohibition. Clause (2) prohibits a citizen of India from accepting any title from a foreign State. Clause (3) provides that a non-citizen who holds any office of office of profit or trust under the State shall not accept, without the consent of the President, any title from any foreign State. Clause (4) provides that no person citizen or non citizen holding any office of profit or trust, shall, without consent of the President, accept any present or emolument or office of any kind from or under any foreign State.
  • 9.
     American Constitutionunder Article 8 also have the similar provision and have prohibited the persons holding the office of trust or profit from receiving gifts in any forms from foreign states without the permission of the Congress.  In Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (AIR 1996 SC 770), In 1954 the Government of India introduced four awards namely , Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan and Padma Shri for exceptional and distinguished service in any field including public service. These awards were abolished in 1977 but were reinstated in 1980. There validity was challenged in the
  • 10.
    Court under Article18 on the ground of their inconsistency with that article.  Court observed that it does not conflict with Article 18 and Court also noted indiscriminate conferment of these awards without any clear guidelines and it advised that a committee under the Prime Minister consisting among others i.e., Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the Chief Justice of India or his nominee and the leader of the opposition in consultation with the President of India should nominate persons for these awards.
  • 11.
    CONCLUSION Article 18 thusabolishes the conferment of titles through different ways. Its to be noted here that Article18 does not, like Article 17 provide breach of any obligation will be an offence punishable in accordance with law.