EQUALITY BEFORE LAW-- Article 14
Article 14 declares that ‘the State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India’. Thus Article 14 uses two phrases.
While both the expressions may seem to be identical, they do not convey the same meaning.
‘EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW’
This expression is of English origin. Expression “equality before the law’ is a somewhat negative concept implying the absence of any special privilege in favour of individuals and the equal subject of all classes to the ordinary law.
“EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS’
This expression has been taken form (the American Constitution. ‘Equal protection of the laws’ is a more positive concept implying equality of treatment in equal circumstances.
Both these expressions aim at establishing what is called ‘equality of status” in the Preamble of the Constitution. However, one dominant idea common to both the expressions is that of equal justice.
STATE OF WEST BENGAL V. ANWAR ALI SARKAR,
In STATE OF WEST BENGAL V. ANWAR ALI SARKAR, AIR 1952 SC 75. Patanjali Sastri, C.J. has rightly observed that the second expression is corollary of the first and it is difficult to imagine a situation in which the violation of the equal protection of laws will not be the violation of the equality before law. Thus, in substance the two expressions mean one and the same thing.
The words ‘any person’ in Article 14 of the Constitution denotes that the guarantee of the equal protection of laws is available to any person which includes any company or association or body of individuals The protection of Article 14 extends to both citizens and non-citizens and to natural persons a well as legal persons.
EQUALITY BEFORE LAW
The concept of equality does not mean absolute equality among human beings which is physically not possible to achieve.
It is a concept implying absence of any special privilege by reason of birth, creed or the like in favour of any individual, and also the equal subject of all individuals and classes to the ordinary law of the land.
As Dr. Jennings puts it: Equality before the law means that among equals the law should be equal and should be equally administered, that like should be treated alike.
The right to sue and be sued, to prosecute and be prosecuted for the same kind of action should be same for all citizens of full age and understanding without distinctions of race, religion, wealth, social status or political influence” Jennings—Law of the Constitution, p. 49 3rd ed
EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS
The guarantee of equal protection of laws is similar to one embodied in the 4th Amendment to the American Constitution. The 14th Amendment says: Nor shall any State—deny to any person equal protection of laws”.
LINDSLEY V. NATURAL CARBONIC GAS CO. 1910 220 US 61.
This has been interpreted to mean subjection to equal law, applying to all in the same circumstances.
It only means that all persons similarly circumstance shall be treated alike both in the privileges conferred and liabilities imposed by the laws. Equal law should be applied to all in the same situation, and there should be no discrimination between one person and another.
STATE OF WEST BENGAL V. ANWAR ALI SARKAR, AIR 1952 SC 75.
As regards the subject-matter of the legislation their position is the same. Thus, the rule is that the like should be treated alike and not that unlike should be treated alike. Dr. V. N. Shukla— Constitution of India p. 27 5th ed
RULE OF LAW
The concept of rule of law was propounded by Dicey. It means that no man is above the law and that every person, whatever be his rank or conditions, is subject to the jurisdiction of ordinary courts. Professor Dicey give three meanings of the Rule of Law thus
ABSENCE OF ARBITRARY POWER OR SUPREMACY OF THE LAW.
It means the absolute supremacy of law as opposed to the arbitrary power of the Government. In other words—a man may be punished for a breach of law, but he can be punished for nothing else.”
EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW.
It means subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by ordinary law courts.
This means that no one is above law with the sole exception of the monarch who can do no wrong’.
Everyone in England, whether he is an official of the State or a private individual, is bound to obey the same law.
Thus, public officials do not hold a privileged position in Great Britain. In Great Britain there is one system of law and one system of courts for all i.e., for public officials and private persons.
THE CONSTITUTION IS THE RESULT OF THE ORDINARY LAW OF THE LAND.
It means that the source of the right of individuals is not the written Constitution, but the rules as defined and enforced by the courts.
The first and the second aspects apply to Indian system but the third aspect of the Dicey’s Rule of law does not apply to Indian system as the source of rights of individuals is the Constitution of India.
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land and all laws passed by the legislature must be consistent with the provisions of the Constitution.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE OF LAW—
The above rule of equality is, however, not an absolute rule and there are number of exceptions to it.
First
Equality before the law’ does not mean the ‘powers of the private citizens are the same as the powers of the public officials”.
Thus, a police officer has the power to arrest while no private person has this power. ‘This is not the violation of the rule of law.
But the rule of law does require that these powers should be clearly defined by law and that abuse of authority by public officers must be punished by ordinary courts in the same manner as illegal acts committed by private persons.
Secondly
The rule of law does not prevent certain classes of persons being subject to special rules. Thus, members of the armed forces are controlled by military laws. Similarly, medical practitioners are subjected to the regulations framed by the Medical Council of India, a statutory body, and are immune from the jurisdiction of ordinary courts. Article 361 of the Indian Constitution affords an immunity to the President of India and the State Governors.
Article 361 provides that the President or the Governor of State shall not be answerable to any Court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of the office or for any act done or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and performance of those powers and duties.
No criminal proceeding shall be instituted or continued against the President or the Government of a State in any Court during his term of office.
No process for the arrest or imprisonment of the President or the Governor of State shall be issued from any Court during his term of office.
Thirdly
Ministers and other executive bodies are given very wide discretionary powers by statute.
A minister may be allowed by law ‘to act as he thinks fit’ or ‘if he is satisfied’. Such power is sometimes abused. Today, a large number of legislation is passed in the form of delegated legislation, i.e., rules, orders or statutory instruments made by ministers and other bodies and not directly by Parliament. These rules did not exist in Dicey’s time.
Fourthly, Certain members of society are governed by special rules in their professions, i.e., lawyers, doctors, nurses, members of armed forces and police. Such classes of people are treated differently from ordinary citizens.
RAGHUBIR SINGH V. STATE OF HARYANA, AIR 1980 SC 1087
The rule of law imposes a duty upon the State to take special measure to prevent and punish brutality by police methodology.
INDIRA NEHRU GANDHI V. RAJ NARAIN, AIR 1975 SC 2299.
The Rule of Law embodied in Article 14 is the basic feature” of the Indian Constitution and hence it cannot be destroyed even by an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 of the Constitution
