BY:- RITIKA SAHNI

B.B.A.LL.B(HONS)
 The principle of natural justice is a product of
common law system. The main aim of this
principle is to create a check and balance method,
basically to prevent the arbitrary use of power by
the State. With the changing time, the powers
conferred to the State have increased. Now, the
State not only takes care of the Government affairs
but also activities like commerce, industries and
communication. So there is a great chance to abuse
such powers by the State which will affect the
rights of the people. So the one and only function
of the principle of natural justice is to prevent the
State from such using of powers.
 Audi alteram partem.

 Nemo judex in causa sua.

 Rule of natural justice must be the fundamental
principle of every truthful felony device to
protect the simple rights of the people.
 THE ISSUE IS TO MAKE A COMPARATIVE
ANALYSIS OF THE WORKING OF INDIAN
AND BRITISH CONSTITUTION TO SHIELD
THESE TWO IDEAS OF NATURAL JUSTICE.
 Rule of natural justice is a very core concept in
the Indian constitution
 Article 14,19 and 21 lay down the nook stone
of this principle
 Cases:-
 A.K Gopalan v State of Madras
 Maneka Gandhi v Union of India
 Also includes
 Right to notice
 Right to know evidences against him
 Right to cross examination
Thus, it is clear that the natural justice plays a
vital role in Indian judicial system. Supreme
Court of India by the process of judicial
activism continuously protects this idea. Rule
of natural justice is the main weapon to the
hand of the court for protecting people from
any type of arbitrary power.
 Parliamentary sovereignty

 The Parliament can make law in any area.

 No Parliament can bind its successor.
 Nobody except a Parliament can change or
reverse a law passed by the Parliament
 It took a position in the British Constitutional
system by removing two important concepts,
which were prevailing there in the British
Constitutional system till 1600. These two are:

 Natural law doctrine.

 Locke’s concept of social contract.
 So it so true that the U.K Constitution puts a
step forward for giving natural justice an
important place in the legal arena. But if we
follow Dicey, he says that the law should be
supreme in nature, everyone should be equal
before the law and exclusion of all types of
arbitrary powers. This exclusion of the
arbitrary powers is also one important feature
of the natural justice. So it can be said that the
“rule of law” also provides some components
of the natural justice rule.
 Thus it can be said after analysis these two
constitutional frameworks of these two
countries, that there is no doubt that the rule of
natural justice is one of the fundamental
guarantor of the basic rights of the people.For
Indian context I would like to say that Supreme
Court should make more liberal construction,
while interpreting any law relating to
fundamental rights. And for the British context,
I think they are going in a right way to give the
actual value to the basic rights of the people as
well as to the concept of natural law..
 Hence it is proved that rule of natural law is a
very core concept of any fair legal system. This
concept presents in each and every efficient
legal system throughout the world, but may be
in different form or in an indirect manner.
THANKYOU