The Constitution of India not only grants its citizens extensive Fundamental Rights but also expects them to uphold certain Fundamental Duties.
These duties serve as a constant reminder of the national goals and the basic norms of democratic conduct, fostering a sense of discipline and national commitment.
The idea behind incorporating fundamental rights was to emphasize the obligation of citizens in exchange for the comprehensive fundamental rights they enjoy.
Let's delve into the topic of Fundamental Duties, which all Indian citizens are morally bound to perform, as required for various Kerala PSC exams.
History
The concept of Fundamental Duties was adopted by the framers of the Indian Constitution from the Constitution of the Soviet Union (USSR).
Swaran Singh Committee (1976)
It was the Swaran Singh Committee that recommended the inclusion of fundamental duties in the Indian Constitution.
It emphasized that citizens must recognize that, alongside the enjoyment of their fundamental rights, they also have certain obligations or duties to fulfill.
The Swaran Singh Committee also made other recommendations, such as amending the Preamble to substitute the expression 'Sovereign, Democratic, Secular, Socialist Republic' for 'Sovereign Democratic Republic.'
This led to the inclusion of 'Socialist' and 'Secular' in the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment, but the wording was slightly different from the committee's recommendation.
42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976
As per the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee, the Congress government under Indira Gandhi decided to include the Fundamental Duties in the Constitution.
Thus, the Fundamental Duties were incorporated into Part IV-A of the Indian Constitution by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 (famously known as the 'Mini-Constitution').
86th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2002
Initially, there were 10 Fundamental Duties listed in Article 51(A), with the eleventh being incorporated by the 86th Amendment in 2002, which introduced Article 21(A) into the Constitution of India.
Key Features of Fundamental Duties
- Non-Justiciable: Unlike Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties are not directly enforceable by courts. No citizen can be punished by a court solely for their violation, though Parliament is free to enforce them through suitable legislation.
- Applicable to Citizens Only: These duties apply only to the citizens of India and not to foreigners.
- Moral and Civic: These encompass both ethical obligations (such as upholding the esteemed principles of the freedom struggle) and civic duties (including reverence for the Constitution, National Flag, and National Anthem).
- Rooted in Tradition: They are a codification of tasks integral to the Indian way of life, drawing inspiration from Indian culture, traditions, and mythology.
The 11 Fundamental Duties (Article 51-A)
The 11 fundamental duties that every citizen of India must perform are as follows:
| Sl. No. | Nature of Duty | Article | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Civic | 51A(a) | To abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem. |
| 2. | Moral | 51A (b) | To cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom. |
| 3. | National | 51A (c) | To uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. |
| 4. | National | 51A (d) | To defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so. |
| 5. | Social | 51A (e) | To promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India, transcending religious, linguistic, and regional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. |
| 6. | Cultural | 51A (f) | To value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture. |
| 7. | Environmental | 51A(g) | To protect and improve the natural environment, including forests, lakes, rivers, and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures. |
| 8. | Intellectual | 51A(h) | To develop the scientific temper, humanism, and the spirit of inquiry and reform. |
| 9. | Civic | 51A (i) | To safeguard public property and to abjure violence. |
| 10. | Excellence | 51A (j) | To strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavor and achievement. |
| 11. | Parental / Educational | 51A(k) | To provide opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may be, ward between the ages of six and fourteen years (Added by the 86th Amendment, 2002). |
Landmark Supreme Court Judgment on Fundamental Duties
The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that while Fundamental Duties (Article 51A) are non-justiciable, they are nonetheless crucial to constitutional governance.
| Case Name | Article 51A Clause(s) | Judicial Implication & Principle Established |
|---|---|---|
| Chandra Bhavan Boarding & Lodging v. State of Mysore (1969) | Pre-Insertion (Part III & IV relied on) | Duty-Right Correlative Principle: Established that the Constitution conceives of both rights and duties. Restrictions on rights are reasonable if they seek to achieve the objectives of the Directive Principles. |
| Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) (National Anthem Case) | 51A(a) | Protected the Fundamental Right to Freedom of Religion (Art. 25) by holding that forced singing of the National Anthem is impermissible; respectful standing fulfills the duty to respect the Constitution. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1988) (Ganga Pollution Case) | 51A(g) | Issued mandatory directions for the Central Government to introduce compulsory environmental education in schools (at least one hour weekly), linking the duty to education and the environment. |
| Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996) | 51A(j) | Upholding National Honors: Upheld the constitutional validity of national awards (Bharat Ratna, Padma Awards), referencing the duty to 'strive towards excellence' to recognize merit. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Taj Trapezium Case) (1996) | 51A(g), 51A(f) | Ordered the closure or conversion of polluting industries near the Taj Mahal, constitutionalizing the Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle via the duty to protect the environment and national heritage. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (2000) | 51A(g) | Established that the citizen's duty (51A(g)) and the State's obligation (Art. 48A) must be read in light of Article 21 (Right to Life), making the right to a clean environment a justiciable Fundamental Right. |
| AIIMS Students Union v. AIIMS and Ors. (2001) | 51A(j) | Declared that Fundamental Duties are equally important as Fundamental Rights. Referenced the duty to 'strive towards excellence' to uphold meritocracy and quality standards in professional and educational institutions. |
| Aruna Roy v. Union of India (2002) | 51A(b), 51A(h) | Upheld the National Curriculum Framework, validating state efforts to promote noble ideals and scientific temper as mandated by Fundamental Duties. |
| Javed v. State of Haryana (2003) | Article 51A (General) | Upheld a law disqualifying individuals with more than two children from contesting Panchayat elections, aligning the law with the goal of sustainable development and population control, which is consistent with citizen duties. |
| State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat (2005) | 51A(g) | Upheld the ban on cow slaughter, viewing the law as a reasonable restriction on trade (Art. 19(1)(g)) justified by the duty to have 'compassion for living creatures.' |
| Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India (2018) | 51A(a) | Modified prior mandatory orders, making the playing of the National Anthem in cinemas optional, recognizing the balance between constitutional duty and individual choice. |
| Ranjitsingh v. Union of India (2024) | 51A(g) | Declared the 'Right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change' as a Fundamental Right (Art. 14 and 21), solidifying 51A(g) as a constitutional protection against global ecological threats. |
The most frequently invoked Fundamental Duty in cases before the Supreme Court of India is generally considered to be Article 51A(g), which relates to the protection and improvement of the natural environment.
This duty has been extensively relied upon by the Supreme Court, especially in Public Interest Litigation (PIL), for several key reasons:
- Expanded Scope of Right to Life: The Supreme Court has read this Fundamental Duty (Article 51A(g)) along with the Directive Principle (Article 48A) and the Fundamental Right to Life (Article 21). The courts have interpreted the Right to Life to include the Right to a Wholesome and Clean Environment. This link has made the duty of citizens to protect the environment highly judicially relevant.
- Landmark Environmental Cases: A multitude of the Supreme Court's most significant environmental rulings, frequently associated with the renowned environmental lawyer M.C. Mehta, have cited this obligation. A key example is:
- M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath (1996): The Court emphasized that Article 51A(g) imposes a duty on every citizen to protect and improve the natural environment, noting that those who disturb the ecological balance violate this duty.
- State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat (2005): The court upheld the constitutional validity of a ban on cow slaughter, in part by referring to the duty of citizens under Article 51A(g) to have "compassion for living creatures."
- Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja and others (2014): The court read the provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act along with Article 51A(g) to ensure the protection and compassionate treatment of animals (specifically in the context of Jallikattu).
Other Frequently Invoked Fundamental Duties
While 51A(g) is prominent, other duties are also frequently cited by the court to underscore constitutional morality and civic responsibilities:
- To Abide by the Constitution and Respect its Ideals (Article 51A(a)): This is often invoked in cases concerning national symbols and institutions, such as the Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) case (National Anthem case), and in general appeals for respecting the rule of law.
- To Safeguard Public Property and Abjure Violence (Article 51A(i)): This duty is cited in contexts of public protests, riots, and property damage, like in the In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012) case, where the court stressed the organizers' duty to safeguard public property.
- Duty to Provide Education (Article 51A(k)): This duty, added by the 86th Amendment, 2002, is crucial as it complements the Fundamental Right to Education (Article 21A), imposing a corresponding duty on parents and guardians.
The Correlative Link: Fundamental Rights and Duties
The bond between Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties is typically regarded as correlative and complementary.
The table below shows their correlation:
| Fundamental Right (Protection Granted to the Citizen) | Corresponding Fundamental Duty (Obligation Expected from the Citizen) | |
|---|---|---|
| Article 19: Freedom of Speech & Expression (Subject to reasonable restrictions on grounds of sovereignty and integrity of India). | Article 51A(c): Duty 'to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India.' | |
| Article 21: Right to Life, including the right of women to be treated with decency and dignity. | Article 51A(e): Duty 'to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women.' | |
| Article 21A: Right to free and compulsory education for all children aged 6-14 years. | Article 51A(k): Duty to a parent/guardian to provide opportunities for education to their child/ward between the ages of 6-14 years.' | |
| Article 23(2): Right against forced labor, with the provision that the State can impose compulsory service for public purposes (e.g., military service). | Article 51A(d): Duty 'to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so.' |
Justice Verma Committee on Fundamental Duties (1999)
In 1998, the Supreme Court of India issued a notice that directed the Central Government to take steps for the operationalization of Fundamental Duties.
The Justice J.S. Verma Committee on Fundamental Duties of Citizens was constituted by the Government of India in 1999 in response to that notice from the Supreme Court.
Its primary mandate was to examine the operational aspects of Fundamental Duties (Article 51A) and recommend measures to educate and encourage citizens to adhere to these duties.
The committee recognized that mere legislation was insufficient for the fulfillment of these duties and underlined the necessity to build a feeling of duty and commitment among the public, especially from an early age.
The key recommendations of the Verma Committee focused on generating awareness and developing educational strategies. It stressed that awareness about Fundamental Duties must be created, particularly in educational institutions.
The Committee identified the existence of certain legal provisions and enactments already in force that could contribute to the effective implementation of some Fundamental Duties.
These included acts like The Prevention of Insults to National Honor Act, 1971 (for duties related to the National Flag and Anthem) and The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (for the duty to promote harmony)
Beyond educational integration, the committee's report also touched upon the principles that should guide public office holders in relation to their duties.
It is recommended that public officials must uphold integrity, prioritize public interests over individual interests, and be accountable and transparent in their decisions and actions, promoting the principles of Fundamental Duties through leadership and example.
While many of its educational and operational suggestions were acknowledged, the complete and robust implementation of all its recommendations for integrating Fundamental Duties into the education system remains an ongoing challenge.
SideNotes:
- Swaran Singh – Second-longest serving Union Cabinet Minister in India (23 longest continuous and uninterrupted years).
- Involved in the Indus Water Treaty, Tashkent Agreement & the Shimla Agreement.
- Justice J.S. Verma (Jagdish Sharan Verma) – 27th Chief Justice of India & 3rd Chairman of National Human Rights Commission.
- Landmark Judgments -
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) – laid down the Vishaka Guidelines, which led to the creation of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act (2013).
- S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) – curtailed the arbitrary misuse of Article 356.
- The Second Judges Case (1993) – formation of Collegium.
- headed the Justice Verma Committee (2012) after the Delhi gang rape case.
Post a Comment
Post a Comment