Law (from Old English "lagu,"[4]) is a system of rules, usually enforced through a set of institutions.

[5]
Laws can shape or reflect politics, economics and society in numerous ways and serves as a primary
social mediator of relations between people.

A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs a state, city, or county.
[1]
Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy.

The government comprises three branches: the executive, the legislative and the judiciary. The
executive branch headed by the President, who is the Head of State and exercises his or her power
directly or through officers subordinate to him [1]. The Legislative branch or the Parliament consists of
the lower house, the Lok Sabha, and the upper house, the Rajya Sabha, as well as the president. The
Judicial branch has the Supreme Court at its apex, 21 High Courts, and numerous civil, criminal and
family courts at the district level.

Judicial bodies

Supreme Court in India

The Supreme Court is the highest judicial body in India. The Supreme Court
came into power on 28th January 1950; just two days after the Constitution of
India came to effect. In the initial stages, it had its office in a part of the
Parliament House. The Supreme Court is endowed with many duties and
responsibilities. The biggest responsibility is that it is the highest court of appeal
and is also the protector of the Constitution in the country.

The Chief Justice of India and 25 other judges make up the Supreme Court of
India. The appointments are done directly by the President of India. There are
certain criteria that have to be fulfilled by the advocates to become a judge of
the Supreme Court. Being a citizen of India is one of the most important criteria.
Apart from this, the person has to have an experience of minimum five years as
a judge in the High Court or any other two courts one after another. He should
also be a prominent jurist as per the President of the country, so that he can
take up responsibilities well. The Chief Justice is also consulted at the time of
appointment of the judges in the Supreme Court.

The Judges of the Supreme Court are free to exercise their power as and when
required. The process of removal of the Supreme Court judges is quite an
interesting but lengthy process. An order from the President is mandatory in
case of removal of the judges. A two-thirds majority has to be obtained from
both the houses for the removal of the judges.

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is divided into original jurisdiction,

advisory jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction is required
when there is a dispute between the Government and the states of India or any
one state of India. The Supreme Court can also enforce fundamental Rights
according to the Article 32 of the Constitution of India.

The appellate jurisdiction is mentioned in Articles 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the

Constitution. The decision of the High Court can be questioned in the Supreme
Court of the country. One can appeal to the Supreme Court, if he or she is not
satisfied with the decision of the High Court. The Supreme Court has the
provision of accepting or rejecting the case at its own discretion. There are also
provisions of pardoning criminals and canceling their lifetime imprisonment or
death sentence by the Supreme Court.

Apart from the original and appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, there is
an advisory jurisdiction that needs special mention. There are many cases that
are directly referred by the President of India and the Supreme Court has to look
into those matters. This provision is mentioned in Article 143 of the Indian
Constitution.

The Supreme Court in India acts as an independent body and is free from any
outer control. The contempt of law court in India is a punishable offence and the
Supreme Court takes care of this immaculately.

High Courts in India

There are High Courts in almost all the states of India and the Union Territories.
The High Courts work under the Supreme Court in the country. These courts are
vested with lot of power. They decide on both civil as well as criminal cases.
Most of the cases that are handled by the High Courts of the country are passed
on from the district or lower courts.

The judges of the High Courts are appointed by the President of India, in
consultation with the Chief justice of India and the Governor of the state. The
Chief Justice heads each of the High Courts in India. The numbers of judges vary
from one court to other depending on the area that the High Court covers and
the number of cases that it handles. There are also High Courts that serve more
than one Indian state or Union Territory. Each of these courts have original and
appellate jurisdiction under them. Summons can also be issued by the High
Court. Revenue matters are dealt by original jurisdiction, while an eminent jury
handles original criminal cases.

Established in the year 1862, the Calcutta High Court is the oldest court in India.
Apart from this, there are 18 total High Courts in the country, some of which are
Bombay High Court, Delhi High Court, Chattisgarh High Court, Gujarat High
Court, Jharkhand High Court, Madras High Court, Patna High Court and Sikkim
High Court.

District Courts in India

The District Courts in India take care of judicial matters at the district level.
Headed by a judge, these courts are administratively and judicially controlled by
the High Courts of the respective states, to which the district belongs. There are
many secondary courts also at this level, which work under the District Courts.
There is a court of the Civil Judge as well as a court of the Chief Judicial
Magistrate. While the former takes care of the civil cases, the latter looks into
criminal cases and offences.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate is endowed with the responsibility of deciding

critical cases. He or she has the power of punishing the accused by
imprisonment for a maximum of 7 years. The independence of the judiciary even
at the district level needs a special mention. There is a strong bar in each district
court that ensures proper decisions are made in the cases that come to these
courts. The major problem that is faced by the district courts in India is that
numerous cases get piled up day after day and as a result there is inordinate
delay in the decisions of the court.

Tribunals

There are also various tribunals that have been set up in India that look into
various matters of grave concern. The tribunals that need a special mention are
as follows:

 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

 Central Administrative Tribunal
 Intellectual Property Appellate Tribunal, Chennai
 Railways Claims Tribunal
 Appellate Tribunal for Electricity
 Debts Recovery Tribunal I, Chennai
 Debts Recovery Tribunal II, Chennai
 Central Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal
 Debt Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore

A quasi-judicial body is an individual or organization which has powers resembling those of a court
of law or judge and is able to remedy a situation or impose legal penalties on a person or
organization.

Powers

Such bodies usually have powers of adjudication in such matters as:

breach of discipline

conduct rules

trust in the matters of money or otherwise.

Their powers are usually limited to a particular area of expertise, such as financial markets,
employment law, public standards, immigration, or regulation.

Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence is the theory and philosophy of law. Scholars of jurisprudence, or legal

theorists (including legal philosophers and social theorists of law), hope to obtain a deeper
understanding of the nature of law, of legal reasoning, legal systems and of legal institutions.
Modern jurisprudence began in the 18th century and was focused on the first principles of the
natural law, civil law, and the law of nations.[1] General Jurisprudence can be broken into
categories both by the types of questions scholars seek to address and by the theories of
jurisprudence or schools of thought regarding how those questions are best to be answered.
Contemporary philosophy of law, which deals with general jurisprudence, addresses
problems in two rough groups:[2]

 1.) Problems internal to law and legal systems as such

 2.) Problems of law as a particular social institution as it relates to the larger political and
social situation in which it exists.

Answers to these questions come from four primary schools of thought in general
jurisprudence:[2]

 Natural law Natural law theory asserts that there are laws that are immanent in nature, to
which enacted laws should correspond as closely as possible. This view is frequently
summarised by the maxim an unjust law is not a true law , lex iniusta non est lex, in which
'unjust' is defined as contrary to natural law. Natural law is closely associated with morality
and, in historically influential versions, with the intentions of God.

Aristotle is often said to be the father of natural law. Aristotle's theory of justice is bound up
in his idea of the golden mean. Indeed his treatment of what he calls "political justice"
derives from his discussion of “the just” as a moral virtue derived as the mean between
opposing vices, just like every other virtue he describes

Sharia (‫ش ِري َع ٌة‬

َ ) refers to the body of Islamic law. The term means "way" or "path"; it is the
legal framework within which public and most private aspects of life are regulated for those
living in a legal system based on Islamic principles of jurisprudence. Fiqh is the term for
Islamic jurisprudence, made up of the rulings of Islamic jurists

 Legal Positivism, by contrast to natural law, holds that there is no necessary connection
between law and morality and that the force of law comes from some basic social facts
although positivists differ on what those facts are.
 Legal Realism is a third theory of jurisprudence which argues that the real world practice of
law is what determines what law is; the law has the force that it does because of what
legislators, judges, and executives do with it. Similar approaches have been developed in
many different ways in Sociology of law.
 Critical Legal Studies is a younger theory of jurisprudence that has developed since the
1970s which is primarily a negative thesis that the law is largely contradictory and can be
best analyzed as an expression of the policy goals of the dominant social group.

The three major legal systems of the world today consist of civil law, common law and religious law.
However, each country (see State law) often develops variations on each system or incorporates
many other features into the system

Civil law (or civilian law) is a legal system inspired by Roman law, the primary feature of which is
that laws are written into a collection, codified, and not (as in common law) determined by judges.[1]
Conceptually, it is the group of legal ideas and systems ultimately derived from the Code of Justinian

The principle of civil law is to provide all citizens with an accessible and written collection of the laws
which apply to them and which judges must follow. It is the most prevalent and oldest surviving legal
system in the world[citation needed]. Colonial expansion spread the civil law system and European civil law
has been adopted in much of Latin America as well as in parts of Asia and Africa.

Germany, French Europe china brazil turkey

Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals (also
called case law), rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action. A "common law
system" is a legal system that gives great precedential weight to common law, [1] on the principle that
it is unfair to treat similar facts differently on different occasions. [2] The body of precedent is called
"common law" and it binds future decisions. In cases where the parties disagree on what the law is,
an idealized common law court looks to past precedential decisions of relevant courts. If a similar
dispute has been resolved in the past, the court is bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior
decision

Singapore, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan, UK

Federal courts and 49 states use legal system originally based on English common law but which
diverged greatly in 19th century with substantial indigenous innovations and borrowing of some civil
law practices such as codification;
State law in the U.S. state of Louisiana is based upon French and Spanish civil law

Religious Law

In some religions, law can be thought of as the ordering principle of reality; knowledge as
revealed by a God defining and governing all human affairs. Law, in the religious sense, also
includes codes of ethics and morality which are upheld and required by the God. Examples
include customary Halakha (Jewish law) and Hindu law, and to an extent, Sharia (Islamic
law) and Canon law (Christian law).[1]

Sharia and Canon law differ from other religious laws in that Canon law is the codes of law
of the Catholic, Anglican and Orthodox churches (like in a civil law tradition), while Sharia
law derives many of its laws from juristic precedent and reasoning by analogy (like in a
common law tradition).

Indian Contract Act 1872

Indian Contract Act 1872 is the main source of law regulating contracts in Indian law, as
subsequently amended.

It determines the circumstances in which promise made by the parties to a contract shall be
legally binding on them. All of us enter into a number of contracts everyday knowingly or
unknowingly. Each contract creates some right and duties upon the contracting parties. Indian
contract deals with the enforcement of these rights and duties upon the parties.

The Indian Contract Act 1872 sections 1-75 came into force on 1 September 1872. It applies
to the whole of India except the state of Jammu and Kashmir. It is not a complete and
exhaustive law on all types of contracts.
Definition

Section 2(h) of the Act defines the term contract as "an agreement enforceable by law".

Section 2(e) defines agreement as "every promise and every set of promises, forming the
consideration for each other."

Again Section 2(b) defines promise in these words: "when the person to whom the proposal is
made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. Proposal when accepted,
becomes a promise."

Essential Elements of a Valid Contract

According to Section 10, "All agreements are contracts, if they are made by the free consent
of the parties, competent to contract, for a lawful consideration with a lawful object, and not
hereby expressly to be void."

Essential Elements of a Valid Contract are:-

1.Proper offer and proper acceptance.

2.Lawful Consideration: An agreement to form a valid contract should be supported by

consideration. Consideration means “something in return” (quid pro quo). It can be cash,
kind, an act or abstinence. It can be past, present or future. However, consideration should be
real and lawful.

3.Competent to Contract or Capacity ,section (11).

4.Free Consent, section (13 & 14): To constitute a valid contract there must be free and
genuine consent of the parties to the contract. It should not be obtained by misrepresentation,
fraud, coercion, undue influence or mistake.

5. Lawful Object and Agreement, section (23): The object of the agreement must not be
illegal or unlawful.

6. Agreement not declared void or illegal, section (24-30): Agreements which have been
expressly declared void or illegal by law are not enforceable at law; hence does not constitute
a valid contract.

7. Intention To Create Legal Relationships

8. Certainity, section (29), Possibility Of Performance

9. Legal Formalities

Types of Contracts

On the basis of Validity:

1. Valid contract: An agreement which has all the essential elements of a contract is called a
valid contract. A valid contract can be enforced by law.

2. Void contract[Section 2(j)]: A void contract is a contract which ceases to be enforceable by

law. A contract when originally entered into may be valid and binding on the parties. It may
subsequently become void.

3. Voidable contract[Section 2(i)]: An agreement which is enforceable by law at the option of

one or more of the parties thereto, but not at the option of other or others, is a voidable
contract. If the essential element of free consent is missing in a contract, the law confers
right on the aggrieved party either to reject the contract or to accept it. However, the
contract continues to be good and enforceable unless it is repudiated by the aggrieved party.

4. Illegal contract: A contract is illegal if it is forbidden by law; or is of such nature that, if

permitted, would defeat the provisions of nay law or is fraudulent; or involves or implies
injury to a person or property of another, or court regards it as immoral or opposed to public
policy. These agreements are punishable by law. These are void-ab-initio.

“All illegal agreements are void agreements but all void agreements are not illegal.”

5. Unenforceable contract: Where a contract is good in substance but because of some

technical defect cannot be enforced by law is called unenforceable contract. These contracts
are neither void nor voidable.

On the basis of Formation:

1. Express contract: Where the terms of the contract are expressly agreed upon in words
(written or spoken) at the time of formation, the contract is said to be express contract.

2. Implied contract: An implied contract is one which is inferred from the acts or conduct of
the parties or from the circumstances of the cases. Where a proposal or acceptance is made
otherwise than in words, promise is said to be implied.

3. Tacit contract.

4. Quasi contract: A quasi contract is created by law. Thus, quasi contracts are strictly not
contracts as there is no intention of parties to enter into a contract. It is legal obligation which
is imposed on a party who is required to perform it. A quasi contract is based on the principle
that a person shall not be allowed to enrich himself at the expense of another.

On the basis of Performance:

1. Executed contract: An executed contract is one in which both the parties have performed
their respective obligation.

2. Executory contract: An executory contract is one where one or both the parties to the
contract have still to perform their obligations in future. Thus, a contract which is partially
performed or wholly unperformed is termed as executory contract.
3. Unilateral contract: A unilateral contract is one in which only one party has to perform his
obligation at the time of the formation of the contract, the other party having fulfilled his
obligation at the time o the contract or before the contract comes into existence.

4. Bilateral contract: A bilateral contract is one in which the obligation on both the parties to
the contract is outstanding at the time of the formation of the contract. Bilateral contracts are
also known as contracts with executory consideration.

Offer

Proposal is defined under section 2(a) of the Indian contract Act, 1872 as "when one person
signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything with a view to
obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a
proposal/offer". Thus, for a valid offer, the party making it must express his willingness to do
or not to do something. But mere expression of willingness does not constitute an offer. An
offer should be made to obtain the assent of the other. The offer should be communicated to
the offeree and it should not contain a term the non compliance of which would amount to
acceptance.

Classification of Offer

1. General Offer: Which is made to public in general.

2. Special Offer: Which is made to a definite person.

3. Cross Offer: Exchange of identical offer in ignorance of each other.

4. Counter Offer: Modification and Variation of Original offer.

5. Standing, Open or Continuing Offer: Which is open for a specific period of time.

The offer must be distinguished from an invitation to offer.

Invitation to offer

An invitation to offer is only a circulation of an offer, it is an attempt to induce offers and

precedes a definite offer. Acceptance of an invitation to an offer does not result contract and
only an offer emerges in the process of negotiation. A statement made by a person who does
not intend to bound by it but, intends to further act, is an invitation to offer.

Acceptance

According to Section 2(b), "When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his
assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted."

Rules:

1. Acceptance must be absolute and unqualified.

2. Communicated to offeror.

3. Acceptance must be in the mode prescribed.

4. Acceptance must be given within a reasonable time before the offer lapses.

5. Acceptance by the way of conduct.

6. Mere silence is no acceptance.

Lawful Consideration

According to Section 2(d), Consideration is defined as: "When at the desire of the promisor,
the promisee has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises
to do or abstain something, such an act or abstinence or promise is called consideration for
the promise."

In short, Consideration means quid pro quo i.e. something in return.

An agreement must be supported by a lawful consideration on both sides.

The consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless and until it is- 1.forbidden by
law, or 2.is of such nature that ,if permitted ,it would defeat the provisions of any law ,or 3.is
fraudulant ,or involves or implies injury to the person or property of another ,or 4.the court
regards it as immoral ,or opposed to public policy. 5.consideration may take in any form-
money,goods,services,a promise to marry, a promise to forbear etc.

Competent To Contract

Section 11 of The Indian Contract Act specifies that every person is competent to contract
provided:

1. He should not be a minor i.e an individual who has not attained the age of majority i.e. 18
years.

2. He should be of sound mind while making a contract. A person with unsound mind cannot
make a contract.

3. He is not a person who has been personally disqualified by law.

Free Consent

According to Section 13, " two or more persons are said to be consented when they agree
apon the same thing in the same sense (Consensus-ad-idem).

A consent is said to be free when it not caused by coercion or undue influence or fraud or
misrepresentation or mistake.

Elements Vitiating free Consent

1. Coersion (Section 15): "Coercion" is the committing, or threatening to commit, any act
forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, or the unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain, any
property, to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person to
enter into an agreement.

2. Undue influence (Section 16): "Where a person who is in a position to dominate the will of
another enters into a contract with him and the transaction appears on the face of it, or on the
evidence, to be unconscionable, the burden of proving that such contract was not induced by
undue influence shall lie upon the person in the position to dominate the will of the other."

3. Fraud (Section 17): "Fraud" means and includes any of the following acts committed by a
party to a contract, or with his connivance, or by his agent, with intent to deceive another
party thereto of his agent, or to induce him to enter into the contract.

4. Misrepresentation (Section 18).

5. Mistake of fact (Section 20).

[edit] Revocation of Offer

A proposal may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is
complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards. An acceptance may be revoked at any
time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not
afterwards.

A proposal is revoked -

(1) by the communication of notice of revocation by the proposer to the other party;

(2) by the lapse of the time prescribed in such proposal for its acceptance, or, if no time is so
prescribed, by the lapse of a reasonable time, without communication of the acceptance;

(3) by the failure of the acceptor to fulfill a condition precedent to acceptance; or

(4) by the death or insanity of the proposer, if the fact of the death or insanity comes to the
knowledge of the acceptor before acceptance.

[edit] Agency

In law, the relationship that exists when one person or party (the principal) engages another
(the agent) to act for him, e.g. to do his work, to sell his goods, to manage his business. The
law of agency thus governs the legal relationship in which the agent deals with a third party
on behalf of the principal. The competent agent is legally capable of acting for this principal
vis-à-vis the third party. Hence, the process of concluding a contract through an agent
involves a twofold relationship. On the one hand, the law of agency is concerned with the
external business relations of an economic unit and with the powers of the various
representatives to affect the legal position of the principal. On the other hand, it rules the
internal relationship between principal and agent as well, thereby imposing certain duties on
the representative (diligence, accounting, good faith, etc.).
Under section 201 to 210 an agency may come to an end in a variety of ways:

(i) By the principal revoking the agency – However, principal cannot revoke an agency
coupled with interest to the prejudice of such interest. Such Agency is coupled with interest.
An agency is coupled with interest when the agent himself has an interest in the subject-
matter of the agency, e.g., where the goods are consigned by an upcountry constituent to a
commission agent for sale, with poor to recoup himself from the sale proceeds, the
advances made by him to the principal against the security of the goods; in such a case, the
principal cannot revoke the agent’s authority till the goods are actually sold, nor is the
agency terminated by death or insanity. (Illustrations to section 201)

(ii) By the agent renouncing the business of agency;

(iii) By the business of agency being completed;

(iv) By the principal being adjudicated insolvent (Section 201 of The Indian Contract Act.
1872)

The principal also cannot revoke the agent’s authority after it has been partly exercised, so as
to bind the principal (Section 204), though he can always do so, before such authority has
been so exercised (Sec 203).

Further, as per section 205, if the agency is for a fixed period, the principal cannot terminate
the agency before the time expired, except for sufficient cause. If he does, he is liable to
compensate the agent for the loss caused to him thereby. The same rules apply where the
agent, renounces an agency for a fixed period. Notice in this connection that want of skill
continuous disobedience of lawful orders, and rude or insulting behavior has been held to be
sufficient cause for dismissal of an agent. Further, reasonable notice has to be given by one
party to the other; otherwise, damage resulting from want of such notice, will have to be paid
(Section 206). As per section 207, the revocation or renunciation of an agency may be made
expressly or impliedly by conduct. The termination does not take effect as regards the agent,
till it becomes known to him and as regards third party, till the termination is known to them
(Section 208).

When an agent’s authority is terminated, it operates as a termination of subagent also.

(Section 210).[1]

Right to equality

Right to equality is an important right provided for in Articles 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the
constitution. It is the principal foundation of all other rights and liberties, and guarantees the
following:

 Equality before law: Article 14 of the constitution guarantees that all citizens shall be equally
protected by the laws of the country. It means that the State [5] cannot discriminate against a
citizen on the basis of caste, creed, colour, sex, religion or place of birth. [13] According to the
Electricity Act of 26 January 2003 the Parliament has the power to create special courts [14] for
 the speedy trial of offences committed by persons holding high offices. Creation of special
courts is not a violation of this right.

 Social equality and equal access to public areas: Article 15 of the constitution states that no
person shall be discriminated on the basis of caste, colour, language etc. Every person shall
have equal access to public places like public parks, museums, wells, bathing ghats and
temples etc. However, the State may make any special provision for women and children.
Special provisions may be made for the advancements of any socially or educationally
backward class or scheduled castes or scheduled tribes.[15]

 Equality in matters of public employment: Article 16 of the constitution lays down that the
State cannot discriminate against anyone in the matters of employment. All citizens can
apply for government jobs. There are some exceptions. The Parliament may enact a law
stating that certain jobs can only be filled by applicants who are domiciled in the area. This
may be meant for posts that require knowledge of the locality and language of the area. The
State may also reserve posts for members of backward classes, scheduled castes or
scheduled tribes which are not adequately represented in the services under the State to
bring up the weaker sections of the society. Also, there a law may be passed which requires
that the holder of an office of any religious institution shall also be a person professing that
particular religion.[16] According to the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill, 2003, this right shall not
be conferred to Overseas citizens of India.[9]

 Abolition of untouchability: Article 17 of the constitution abolishes the practice of

untouchability. Practice of untouchability is an offense and anyone doing so is punishable by
law.[17] The Untouchability Offences Act of 1955 (renamed to Protection of Civil Rights Act in
1976) provided penalties for preventing a person from entering a place of worship or from
taking water from a tank or well.

 Abolition of Titles: Article 18 of the constitution prohibits the State from conferring any
titles. Citizens of India cannot accept titles from a foreign State. [18] The British government
had created an aristocratic class known as Rai Bahadurs and Khan Bahadurs in India — these
titles were also abolished. However, Military and academic distinctions can be conferred on
the citizens of India. The awards of Bharat Ratna and Padma Vibhushan cannot be used by
the recipient as a title and do not, accordingly, come within the constitutional prohibition".
[19]
The Supreme Court, on 15 December 1995, upheld the validity of such awards.

Right to freedom

The Constitution of India contains the right to freedom, given in articles 19, 20, 21 and 22,
with the view of guaranteeing individual rights that were considered vital by the framers of
the constitution. The right to freedom in Article 19 guarantees the following six freedoms:[20]

 Freedom of speech and expression, which enable an individual to participate in public

activities. The phrase, "freedom of press" has not been used in Article 19, but freedom of
expression includes freedom of press. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed in the interest
of public order, security of State, decency or morality.

 Freedom to assemble peacefully without arms, on which the State can impose reasonable
restrictions in the interest of public order and the sovereignty and integrity of India.
  Freedom to form associations or unions on which the State can impose reasonable
restrictions on this freedom in the interest of public order, morality and the sovereignty and
integrity of India.

 Freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India though reasonable restrictions can
be imposed on this right in the interest of the general public, for example, restrictions may
be imposed on movement and travelling, so as to control epidemics.

 Freedom to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India which is also subject to
reasonable restrictions by the State in the interest of the general public or for the protection
of the scheduled tribes because certain safeguards as are envisaged here seem to be
justified to protect indigenous and tribal peoples from exploitation and coercion. [21] Article
370 restricts citizens from other Indian states and Kashmiri women who marry men from
other states from purchasing land or property in Jammu & Kashmir.[22]

 Freedom to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business on

which the State may impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general public.
Thus, there is no right to carry on a business which is dangerous or immoral. Also,
professional or technical qualifications may be prescribed for practicing any profession or
carrying on any trade.

The constitution also guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, which in turn cites
specific provisions in which these rights are applied and enforced:

 Protection with respect to conviction for offences is guaranteed in the right to life and
personal liberty. According to Article 20, no one can be awarded punishment which is more
than what the law of the land prescribes at that time. This legal axiom is based on the
principle that no criminal law can be made retrospective, that is, for an act to become an
offence, the essential condition is that it should have been an offence legally at the time of
committing it. Moreover, no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a
witness against himself. "Compulsion" in this article refers to what in law is called "Duress"
(injury, beating or unlawful imprisonment to make a person do something that he does not
want to do). This article is known as a safeguard against self incrimination. The other
principle enshrined in this article is known as the principle of double jeopardy, that is, no
person can be convicted twice for the same offence, which has been derived from Anglo
Saxon law. This principle was first established in the Magna Carta.[23]

 Protection of life and personal liberty is also stated under right to life and personal liberty.
Article 21 declares that no citizen can be denied his life and liberty except by law. [24] This
means that a person's life and personal liberty can only be disputed if that person has
committed a crime. However, the right to life does not include the right to die, and hence,
suicide or an attempt thereof, is an offence. (Attempted suicide being interpreted as a crime
has seen many debates. The Supreme Court of India gave a landmark ruling in the year 1994.
The court repealed section 309 of the Indian penal code, under which people attempting
suicide could face prosecution and prison terms of up to one year. [25] In the year 1996
however another Supreme Court ruling nullified the earlier one. [26]) "Personal liberty"
includes all the freedoms which are not included in Article 19 (that is, the six freedoms). The
right to travel abroad is also covered under "personal liberty" in Article 21. [27]

 In 2002, through the 86th Amendment Act, Article 21(A) was incorporated. It made the right
to primary education part of the right to freedom, stating that the State would provide free
 and compulsory education to children from six to fourteen years of age. [28] Six years after an
amendment was made in the Indian Constitution, the union cabinet cleared the Right to
Education Bill in 2008. It is now soon to be tabled in Parliament for approval before it makes
a fundamental right of every child to get free and compulsory education. [29]

 Rights of a person arrested under ordinary circumstances is laid down in the right to life and
personal liberty. No one can be arrested without being told the grounds for his arrest. If
arrested, the person has the right to defend himself by a lawyer of his choice. Also an
arrested citizen has to be brought before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours. The rights
of a person arrested under ordinary circumstances are not available to an enemy alien. They
are also not available to persons detained under the Preventive Detention Act. Under
preventive detention, the government can imprison a person for a maximum of three
months. It means that if the government feels that a person being at liberty can be a threat
to the law and order or to the unity and integrity of the nation, it can detain or arrest that
person to prevent him from doing this possible harm. After three months such a case is
brought before an advisory board for review. [30]

The constitution also imposes restrictions on these rights. The government restricts these
freedoms in the interest of the independence, sovereignty and integrity of India. In the interest
of morality and public order, the government can also impose restrictions. However, the right
to life and personal liberty cannot be suspended. The six freedoms are also automatically
suspended or have restrictions imposed on them during a state of emergency.

Right against exploitation

Child labour and Begar is prohibited under Right against exploitation.

The right against exploitation, given in Articles 23 and 24, provides for two provisions,
namely the abolition of trafficking in human beings and Begar (forced labor),[31] and abolition
of employment of children below the age of 14 years in dangerous jobs like factories and
mines. Child labour is considered a gross violation of the spirit and provisions of the
constitution.[32] Begar, practised in the past by landlords, has been declared a crime and is
punishable by law. Trafficking in humans for the purpose of slave trade or prostitution is also
prohibited by law. An exception is made in employment without payment for compulsory
services for public purposes. Compulsory military conscription is covered by this provision.
[31]

Right to freedom of religion

Right to freedom of religion, covered in Articles 25, 26, 27 and 28, provides religious
freedom to all citizens of India. The objective of this right is to sustain the principle of
secularism in India. According to the Constitution, all religions are equal before the State and
no religion shall be given preference over the other. Citizens are free to preach, practice and
propagate any religion of their choice.

Religious communities can set up charitable institutions of their own. However, activities in
such institutions which are not religious are performed according to the laws laid down by the
government. Establishing a charitable institution can also be restricted in the interest of public
order, morality and health.[33] No person shall be compelled to pay taxes for the promotion of
a particular religion.[34] A State run institution cannot impart education that is pro-religion.[35]
Also, nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State
from making any further law regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or
other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice, or providing for social
welfare and reform.[36]

[edit] Cultural and educational rights

As India is a country of many languages, religions, and cultures, the Constitution provides
special measures, in Articles 29 and 30, to protect the rights of the minorities. Any
community which has a language and a script of its own has the right to conserve and
develop it. No citizen can be discriminated against for admission in State or State aided
institutions.[37]

All minorities, religious or linguistic, can set up their own educational institutions in order to
preserve and develop their own culture. In granting aid to institutions, the State cannot
discriminate against any institution on the basis of the fact that it is administered by a
minority institution.[38] But the right to administer does not mean that the State can not
interfere in case of maladministration. In a precedent-setting judgment in 1980, the Supreme
Court held that the State can certainly take regulatory measures to promote the efficiency and
excellence of educational standards. It can also issue guidelines for ensuring the security of
the services of the teachers or other employees of the institution. In another landmark
judgement delivered on 31 October 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that in case of aided
minority institutions offering professional courses, admission could only be through a
common entrance test conducted by State or a university. Even an unaided minority
institution ought not to ignore the merit of the students for admission.

Right to constitutional remedies

Right to constitutional remedies empowers the citizens to move a court of law in case of any
denial of the fundamental rights. For instance, in case of imprisonment, the citizen can ask
the court to see if it is according to the provisions of the law of the country. If the court finds
that it is not, the person will have to be freed. This procedure of asking the courts to preserve
or safeguard the citizens' fundamental rights can be done in various ways. The courts can
issue various kinds of writs. These writs are habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo
warranto and certiorari. When a national or state emergency is declared, this right is
suspended by the central government.[39]

The Directive Principles of State Policy, embodied in Part IV of the Constitution, are directions given
to the State to guide the establishment of an economic and social democracy, as proposed by the
Preamble.[76] They set forth the humanitarian and socialist instructions that were the aim of social
revolution envisaged in India by the Constituent Assembly. [77] The State is expected to keep these
principles in mind while framing laws and policies, even though they are non-justiciable in nature.
The Directive Principles may be classified under the following categories: ideals that the State ought
to strive towards achieving; directions for the exercise of legislative and executive power; and rights
of the citizens which the State must aim towards securing. [76]