THE STATE SHALL NOT DENY TO ANY PERSON /EQUALITY BEFORE LAW/ OR THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS

1. ART.14
THE STATE SHALL NOT DENY TO ANY PERSON
/EQUALITY BEFORE LAW/ OR THE EQUAL
PROTECTION OF LAWS
Vaibhav Sonule
Asst.Prof, School of Law
Alliance University
Bangalore

2. Legislative History
PART -I
• English Doctrine of Rule of Law (A.V.Dicey)
Absence of arbitrary power, Equality before Law,
Individual liberty
PART-II
• 14 Amendment of American Constitution
“ No State shall deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of laws”

3. • Art. 7 of UDHR,1948
“All are equal before the law and are entitled
without any discrimination to the equal
protection of laws”

4. STATE
• State U/A 12
• The obligation to grant Art.14 is on the State.

5. EQUALITY
• Preamble – Status and Opportunity
• Equality is essence of Democracy and
accordingly a basic feature of Constitution
(Nagraj v/s UOI, AIR 2006 SC 191)
• Equality in Fact – State is expected to take
affirmative actions for weaker section.
[equality of mankind]
• Equality in Law - Applicability of Law

6. PART –I
Equality Before Law
• No man is above Law
• Among equals the Law should be equal and
should be equally administered.
• NEAGTIVE CONCEPT
No one can claim special previliges
All are equally subject to the ordinary Law

7. PART –II
Equal protection of laws
• Application of same laws without discrimination
to all similarly situated.
• Principal value which govern our policies and
actions.
• Positive Concept
Equality of treatment in equal circumstances
Among the equal the law should be equal
without any discrimination.

8. Judicial Activism and Art.14

9. • E.P.Royappa v/s State of Tamilnadu
(AIR 1974 SC 555)
S.C. laid down “Equality and arbitrariness are
sworn enemies. One belong to Rule of Law
and other absolute monarchy. If an act is
arbitrary, it is violation of Art.14”

10. • Indira Gandhi v/s Raj Narayan
(AIR 1975 SC 2299)
S.C. observed
“Treating all equally sometimes become
inequality. For the purpose of application of
Art.14 people may be classified into different
groups on different grounds on reasonable
classification.”

11. • Maneka Gandhi v/s UOI (AIR 1978 SC 597)
“ Art. 14 is founding faith of the Constitution. It
should not subject to narrow approach. No
attempt should be made to truncate its scope
and meaning as this would violate its activist
magnitude.”

12. • Air India v/s Nargesh Mirza AIR 1981 SC 1829
“This case is an interference with the ordinary
course of human nature. It was not only
unreasonable and arbitrary but contained the
quality of unfairness and exhibited naked
despotism.”

13. Classification
• TWIN TEST
State of West Bengal v/s Anwar Ali Sarkar AIR 1952 SC 75
and
Ramkrishna Dalmiya v/s UOI AIR 1958 SC 538
Whether there is rational and reasonable
classification which distinguishes those grouped
together from others
Whether this classification has rational nexus to
the object to be achieved.

14. • State of Bombay v/s F.N.Balsara
AIR 1951 SC318
The Principal of equality does not mean that
every law must have same application.
The Principal does not take away from the
State the power of classifying person for
Legitimate purpose.
Mere production of inequality is not violation

15. • Classification must be based on real and
substantial distinction.
• If Law deals with members of well defined
class, it is not denial equal protection on the
ground it has no application to other person.

16. • D.S. Nakara v/s Union of India
AIR 1983 SC 130
“ Reasonable Classification and arbitrariness
are conflicting doctrines. If an action is
arbitrary, it is void even though it satisfies the
criteria of reasonable classification.”

17. • K.A.Abbas v/s Union of India
AIR 1971 SC 481
Certification to Films is not violation of Art.14

18. • Shri shrinivasan theatre v/s state of Tamilnadu
• DTC v/s DTC Mazdoor Union
• Pradeep Jain v/s Union of India

19. Rule of Law and Art.14
• A.V.Dicey ---
Absence of Arbitrary Power
Equality before Law
Individual Liberty
• Art.14
Equality before Law – No man is above Law

20. • Equal Protection of Law –
Equal treatment under equal circumstances
State under obligation to perform Art.14
Immunity Power