BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION The Indian constitution is based on several broad principles: 1.

The principle of peoples representations Reflected in provisions dealing with adult suffrage, with special representations for certain sections of society. 2. The principle of democratic governance embodied in the parliamentary system. 3. The principles of individual and collective human rights; civil liberties and social justice: preamble and Fundamental rights 4. The principle of a centralised federation 5. The principle of judicial custodianship: powerful judiciary 6. The principle of change and transformation provides for amendment: 2/3rd simple majority in both houses; sometimes ratification by state legislatures (1/2) also.

The philosophy of the constitution The Preamble (amended once in 1976 to include the terms socialist and secular) Purpose of the Preamble: 1. The Preamble indicates the source from which the constitution derives its authority 2. It states the objectives which the constitution seeks to establish and promote.

Features of the Constitution 1. Drawn from different sources: borrowed constitution Government of India Act, 1935 Fundamental rights from USA Parliamentary system from UK Directive Principles of State Policy from Ireland Emergency provisions from Germany

beautiful patchwork 2. Supplemented by multiple amendments and practically recast by the 42nd, 43rd and 44th amendments between 1976-78 3. It is the most lengthy and detailed constitutional document produced so far: It incorporates the accumulated experience of different countries Detailed administrative provisions are included to remove any loopholes and prevent misuse Vast country with peculiar problems these are dealt with in great detail: Example: Part XVI: SC.ST & BC, Part XVIII: Official language, Part XVII: Emergency provisions

 4. 5. 6. 7.

Constitution of Units included: constitution of Centre and states, of regions with problems (NE states), J&K accorded special status Deals elaborately on Centre-State relations, State-State relations, disputes etc. Detailed list of Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles of State and also fundamental duties More flexible than rigid: Amendments: complicated and difficult: 2/3rds of the members of both houses of parliament. For more important amendments, of state legislature members also Supplement constitutional provisions by legislation A combination of the written law and parliamentary supremacy In spite of being detailed, there is a place for conventions to decide certain matters: for example: proving a majority in front of the president Fundamental rights. These are justifiable rights and are enforceable --------------------------------------------Writs in Indian Constitution The Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs for enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of Indian Constitution. The writ issued by Supreme Court and High Court differs mainly in three aspects: a) The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of fundamental rights whereas a High Court can issue writs for enforcement of fundamental rights along with for any other purpose (refers to the enforcement of any legal right). b) SC can issue writ against a person or government throughout the territory whereas High Court can issue writs against a person residing or against a government located within its territorial jurisdiction or outside its jurisdiction only if the cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction. c) SC writs are under Article 32 which in itself is a fundamental right thus SC cannot refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction. Whereas article 226 is discretionary thus HC can refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction. Types of writs: Habeas Corpus Habeas corpus is a Latin term which literally means "You may have the body". The concept of writ of habeas corpus has originated from England. This is a writ or legal action which can be used by a person to seek relief from illegal detention. The writ is a direction of the Court to a person who is detaining another, commanding him to bring the body of the person in his custody at a specified time to a specified place for a specified purpose. A writ of habeas corpus has only one purpose: to set at liberty a person who is confined without legal justification; to secure release from confinement of a person unlawfully detained. The writ does not

punish the wrong-doer. If the detention is proved unlawful, the person who secures liberty through the writ may proceed against the wrong - doer in any appropriate manner. The writ is issued not only against authorities of the State but also to private individuals or organizations if necessary. Mandamus The Latin word 'mandamus' means 'we command'. The writ of 'mandamus' is an order of the High Court or the Supreme Court commanding a person or a body to do its duty. Usually, it is an order directing the performance of ministerial acts. A ministerial act is one which a person or body is obliged by law to perform under given circumstances. For instance, a licensing officer is obliged to issue a license to an applicant if the latter fulfills all the conditions laid down for the issue of such license. Similarly, an appointing authority should issue a letter of appointment to a candidate if all the formalities of selection are over and if the candidate is declared fit for the appointment. But despite the fulfillment of such conditions, if the officer or the authority concerned refuses or fails to issue the appointment letter, the aggrieved person has a right to seek the remedy through a writ of 'mandamus'. 3. Certiorari Literally, Certiorari means to be certified. It is issued by the higher court to the lower court either to transfer the case pending with the latter to itself or to squash the order already passed by an inferior court, tribunal or quasi judicial authority. The conditions necessary for the issue of writ of certiorari. a. There should be court, tribunal or an officer having legal authority to determine the question with a duty to act judicially. b. Such a court, tribunal or officer must have passed order acting without jurisdiction or in excess of the judicial authority vested by law in such court, tribunal or officer. c. The order could also be against the principles of natural justice or the order could contain an error of judgment in appreciating the facts of the case. 4. Prohibition The Writ of prohibition means to forbid or to stop and it is popularly known as 'Stay Order'. This writ is issued when a lower court or a body tries to transgress the limits or powers vested in it. The writ of prohibition is issued by any High Court or the Supreme Court to any inferior court, or quasi judicial body prohibiting the latter from continuing the proceedings in a particular case, where it has no jurisdiction to try. After the issue of this writ, proceedings in the lower court etc. come to a stop. Difference between Prohibition and Certiorari: 1. While the writ of prohibition is available during the pendency of proceedings, the writ of certiorari can be resorted to only after the order or decision has been announced. 2. Prohibition can be issued only against judicial and quasi judicial authorities whereas Certiorari can be issued even against administrative authorities affecting rights of individuals. Quo Warranto The word Quo-Warranto literally means "by what warrants?" or "what is your authority"? It is a writ issued with a view to restrain a person from holding a public office to which he is not entitled. The writ requires the concerned person to explain to the Court by what authority he holds the office. If a person has usurped a public office, the Court may direct him not to carry out any activities in the office or may

announce the office to be vacant. Thus High Court may issue a writ of quo-warranto if a person holds an office beyond his retirement age.

QUO WARRANTO The meaning of the term Quo Warranto is by what authority. The writ of quo warranto ma y be issued against a person holding a public office or governmental privilege. The issue of summon is followed by legal proceedings, during which an individual's right to hold an office or governmental privilege is challenged. The writ requires the concerned person to explain to the Court by what authority he holds the office. If a person has usurped a public office, the Court may direct him not to carry out any activities in the office or may announce the office to be vacant. Indian Laws on Administration: Conditions for Issuance and Non-Issuance of Writ of Quo Warranto The writ is issued by the Court after reviewing the circumstances of the case. There are a few conditions which must be fulfilled for the grant of the writ of quo warranto India:

The concerned office must be a government unit or public office which performs public duties. Examples of such office members are advocate general, university officials, members of a municipal board. The public office must have a real existence. It should be permanent and cannot be terminated. A person against whom the writ of quo warranto is issued must have the real possession of the public office. The writ shall be issued only when the public office is held by a particular person in an illegal manner. The Court may not grant a writ based on certain grounds, which include:

Where there was acquiescence or acceptance on the part of the appellant Where the issuance would be futile as the holder of the office has already stopped acting in the said office or position When an alternative remedy is available Freedom of Press Relevant cases In a landmark judgement of the case Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India,[2] the Supreme Court held that the freedom of speech and expression has no geographical limitation and it carries with it the right of a citizen to gather information and to exchange thought with others not only in India but abroad also. The constitution of India does not specifically mention the freedom of press. Freedom of press is implied from the Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Thus the press is subject to the restrictions that are provide under the Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Before Independence, there was no constitutional or statutory provision to protect the freedom of press. As observed by the Privy Council in Channing Arnold v. King Emperor:[3] The freedom of the journalist is an ordinary part of the freedom of the subject and to whatever length, the subject in general may go, so also

may the journalist, but apart from statute law his privilege is no other and no higher. The range of his assertions, his criticisms or his comments is as wide as, and no wider than that of any other subject. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution ensures to all its citizens the liberty of expression. Freedom of the press has been included as part of freedom of speech and expression under the Article 19 of the UDHR. The heart of the Article 19 says: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. In Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras,[4] Patanjali Shastri, CJ observed: Freedom of speech and of the press lay at the foundation of all democratic organisations, for without free political discussion no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible. The Supreme Court observed in Union of India v. Assn. for Democratic Reforms:[5] Onesided information, disinformation, misinformation and non-information, all equally create an uninformed citizenry which makes democracy a farce. Freedom of speech and expression includes right to impart and receive information which includes freedom to hold opinions. In Indian Express v. Union of India,[6] it has been held that the press plays a very significant role in the democratic machinery. The courts have duty to uphold the freedom of press and invalidate all laws and administrative actions that abridge that freedom. Freedom of press has three essential elements. They are:1. freedom of access to all sources of information,[7] 2. freedom of publication, and 3. freedom of circulation.[4] In India, the press has not been able to practise its freedom to express the popular views. In Sakal Papers Ltd. v. Union of India,[8] the Daily Newspapers (Price and Page) Order, 1960, which fixed the number of pages and size which a newspaper could publish at a price was held to be violative of freedom of press and not a reasonable restriction under the Article 19(2). Similarly, inBennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India,[9] the validity of the Newsprint Control Order, which fixed the maximum number of pages, was struck down by the Supreme Court of India holding it to be violative of provision of Article 19(1)(a) and not to be reasonable restriction under Article 19(2). The Court struck down the rebuttal of the Government that it would help small newspapers to grow[how?]. In Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras (1950 SCR 594, 607; AIR 1950 SC 124), entry and circulation of the English journal "Cross Road", printed and published in Bombay, was banned by the Government of Madras. The same was held to be violative of the freedom of speech and expression, as without liberty of circulation, publication would be of little value. In Prabha Dutt v. Union of India ((1982) 1 SCC 1; AIR 1982 SC 6.), the Supreme Court directed the Superintendent of Tihar Jail to allow representatives of a few newspapers to interview Ranga and Billa, the death sentence convicts, as they wanted to be interviewed. There are instances when the freedom of press has been suppressed by the legislature. The authority of the government, in such circumstances, has been under the scanner of judiciary. In the case of Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi (AIR 1950 SC 129), the validity of censorship previous to the publication of an English Weekly of Delhi, the Organiser was questioned. The court struck down the Section 7 of the East Punjab Safety Act, 1949, which directed the editor and publisher of a newspaper to submit for scrutiny, in duplicate, before the publication, till the further orders , all communal matters all the matters and news and views about Pakistan, including photographs, and cartoons, on the ground that it was a restriction on the liberty of the press. Similarly, prohibiting newspaper from publishing its own views or views of correspondents about a topic has been held to be a serious encroachment on the freedom of speech and expression.[10]

Restrictions Under Indian law, the freedom of speech and of the press do not confer an absolute right to express one's thoughts freely. Lord Denning, in his well-known book Road to Justice, stated that press is the watchdog to see that every trial is conducted fairly, openly and above board, but the watchdog may sometimes break loose, pointing out facts and incidences which the authorities do not wish the public to know, and has to be punished[dubious discuss] for 'misbehaviour'.[11] With the same token Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Indian constitution enables the legislature to impose certain restrictions on free speech under following heads:

I. security of the State, II. friendly relations with foreign States, III. public order, IV. decency and morality, V. contempt of court, VI. defamation, VII. incitement to an offence, and VIII. sovereignty and integrity of India.

Reasonable restrictions on these grounds can be imposed only by a duly enacted law and not by executive action.[12] Security of the State: Reasonable restrictions can be imposed on the freedom of speech and expression, in the interest of the security of the State. All the utterances intended to endanger the security of the State by crimes of violence intended to overthrow the government, waging of war and rebellion against the government, external aggression or war, etc., may be restrained in the interest of the security of the State.[13] It does not refer to the ordinary breaches of public order which do not involve any danger to the State.[4] Friendly relations with foreign States: This ground was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act of 1951. The State can impose reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression, if it tends to jeopardise the friendly relations of India with other State. Public order: This ground was added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 in order to meet the situation arising from the Supreme Court's decision in Romesh Thapar, s case (AIR 1950 SC 124). The expression 'public order' connotes the sense of public peace, safety and tranquillity. In Kishori Mohan v. State of West Bengal, the Supreme Court explained the differences between three concepts: law and order, public order, security of State. Anything that disturbs public peace or public tranquillity disturbs public order.[14] But mere criticism of the government does not necessarily disturb public order.[15] A law punishing the utterances deliberately tending to hurt the religious feelings of any class has been held to be valid as it is a reasonable restriction aimed to maintaining the public order.[16] It is also necessary that there must be a reasonable nexus between the restriction imposed and the achievement of public order. In Superintendent, Central Prison v. Ram Manohar Lohiya (AIR 1960 SC 633), the Court held the Section 3 of U.P. Special Powers Act, 1932, which punished a person if he incited a single person not to pay or defer the payment of Government dues, as there was no reasonable nexus between the speech and public order. Similarly, the court upheld the validity of the provision empowering a Magistrate to issue directions to protect the public order or tranquillity.[17]

Decency and morality: The word 'obscenity' is identical with the word 'indecency' of the Indian Constitution. In an English case of R. v. Hicklin,[18] the test was laid down according to which it is seen 'whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene tend to deprave and corrupt the minds which are open to such immoral influences'. This test was upheld by the Supreme Court in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1965 SC 881). In this case the Court upheld the conviction of a book seller who was prosecuted under Section 292, I.P.C., for selling and keeping the book Lady Chatterley's Lover. The standard of morality varies from time to time and from place to place. Contempt of court: The constitutional right to freedom of speech would not allow a person to contempt the courts. The expression Contempt of Court has been defined Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The term contempt of court refers to civil contempt or criminal contempt under the Act. But judges do not have any general immunity from criticism of their judicial conduct, provided that it is made in good faith and is genuine criticism, and not any attempt to impair the administration of justice. In In re Arundhati Roy ((2002) 3 SCC 343), the Supreme Court of India followed the view taken in the American Supreme Court (Frankfurter, J.) in Pennekamp v. Florida (328 US 331 : 90 L Ed 1295 (1946)) in which the United States Supreme Court observed: If men, including judges and journalists, were angels, there would be no problem of contempt of court. Angelic judges would be undisturbed by extraneous influences and angelic journalists would not seek to influence them. The power to punish for contempt, as a means of safeguarding judges in deciding on behalf of the community as impartially as is given to the lot of men to decide, is not a privilege accorded to judges. The power to punish for contempt of court is a safeguard not for judges as persons but for the function which they exercise. In E.M.S. Namboodripad v. T.N. Nambiar ((1970) 2 SCC 325; AIR 1970 SC 2015), the Supreme Court confirmed the decision of the High Court, holding Mr. Namboodripad guilty of contempt of court. In M.R. Parashar v. Farooq Abdullah ((1984) 2 SCC 343; AIR 1984 SC 615.), contempt proceedings were initiated against the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir. But the Court dismissed the petition for want of proof. Defamation: The clause (2) of Article 19 prevents any person from making any statement that injures the reputation of another. With the same view, defamation has been criminalised in India by inserting it into Section 499 of the I.P.C. Incitement to an offence: This ground was also added by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951. The Constitution also prohibits a person from making any statement that incites people to commit offence. Sovereignty and integrity of India: This ground was also added subsequently by the Constitution (Sixteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. This is aimed to prohibit anyone from making the statements that challenge the integrity and sovereignty of India. In the opinion of Brajesh Rajak, author of Pornography Law: XXX Must not be Tolerated, "Freedom of speech and expression can not be an excuse for distribution of indecent and immoral content to average person of the society".[19] Practical constraints and curtailments[edit]

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, though freedom activists, as well as most scholars and industrialised jurisdictions throughout the world recognise that freedom of expression includes freedom of press. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed in the interest of public order, security of State, decency or morality.

According to the estimates of Reporters Without Borders, India ranks 120th worldwide in press freedom index (press freedom index for India is 39.33 for 2007).[20] The Indian Constitution, while not mentioning the word "press", provides for "the right to freedom of speech and expression" (Article 19(1) a). However this right is subject to restrictions under subclause (2), whereby this freedom can be restricted for reasons of "sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, preserving decency, preserving morality, in relation to contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to an offence". Laws such as the Official Secrets Act and Prevention of Terrorism Act [21] (POTA) have been used to limit press freedom. Under POTA, person could be detained for up to six months before the police were required to bring charges on allegations for terrorism-related offences. POTA was repealed in 2004, but was replaced by amendments to UAPA.[22] The Official Secrets Act 1923 remains in effect. For the first half-century of independence, media control by the state was the major constraint on press freedom. Indira Gandhi famously stated in 1975 that All India Radio is "a Government organ, it is going to remain a Government organ..." [23] On 26 June 1975, the day after the socalled emergency was declared in violation of the natural rights of Indian citizens, the Mumbai edition of The Times of India in its obituary column carried an entry that read "D.E.M O'Cracy beloved husband of T.Ruth, father of L.I.Bertie, brother of Faith, Hope and Justica expired on 26 June". With the liberalisation starting in the 1990s, private control of media has increased, leading to increasing independence and greater scrutiny of government. Organisations like Tehelka and NDTVhave been particularly influential, e.g. in bringing about the resignation of powerful Haryana minister Venod Sharma. In addition, laws like Prasar Bharati act passed in recent years contribute significantly to reducing the control of the press by the government. ---------------------------------The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines to the central and state governments of India, to be kept in mind while framing laws and policies. These provisions, contained in Part IV of the Constitution of India, are not enforceable by any court, but the principles laid down therein are considered fundamental in the governance of the country, making it the duty of the State[1] to apply these principles in making laws to establish a just society in the country. The concept of Directive Principles of State Policy was borrowed from the Irish Constitution. The makers of the Constitution of India were influenced by the Irish nationalist movement. Hence, the Directive Principles of the Indian constitution have been greatly influenced by the Directive Principles of State Policy.[2] The idea of such policies "can be traced to the Declaration of the Rights of Man proclaimed by Revolutionary France and the Declaration of Independence by the American Colonies."[3] The Indian constitution was also influenced by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Characteristics DPSPs aim to create social and economic conditions under which the citizens can lead a good life. They also aim to establish social and economic democracy through a welfare state. They act as a check on the government, theorized as a yardstick in the hands of the people to measure the performance of the government and vote it out of power if it does not fulfill the promises made during the elections. The Directive Principles are nonjusticiable rights of the people. Article 31-C, inserted by the 25th Amendment Act of 1971 seeks to upgrade the Directive Principles.[6] If laws are made to give effect to the Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights, they shall not be invalid on the grounds that they take away the Fundamental Rights. In case of a conflict between Fundamental Rights and DPSP's, if the DPSP aims at promoting larger interest of the society, the courts shall have to uphold the case in favour of the DPSP.[7] The Directive Principles, though not justiciable, are fundamental in the governance of the country. It shall be the duty of the State[1] to apply these principles in making laws.[8] Besides, all executive agencies should also be guided by these principles. uEven the judiciary has to keep them in mind in deciding tcases.[9][10] Directives The directive principles ensure that the State[1] shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by promoting a social order in which social, economic and political justice is informed in all institutions of life. Also, the State shall work towards reducing economic inequality as well as inequalities in status and opportunities, not only among individuals, but also among groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.[11] The State shall aim for securing right to an adequate means of livelihood for all citizens, both men and women as well as equal pay for equal work for both men and women. The State should work to prevent concentration of wealth and means of production in a few hands, and try to ensure that ownership and control of the material resources is distributed to best serve the common good. Child abuse and exploitation of workers should be prevented. Children should be allowed to develop in a healthy manner and should be protected against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.[12] The State shall provide free legal aid to ensure that equal opportunities for securing justice is ensured to all, and is not denied by reason of economic or other disabilities.[13] The State shall also work for organisation of village panchayats and help enable them to function as units of self-government.[14] The State shall endeavour to provide the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, within the limits of economic capacity,[15] as well as provide for just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief.[16] The State should also ensure living wage and proper working conditions for workers, with full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural activities. Also, the promotion of cottage industries in rural areas is one of the obligations of the State.[17] The State shall take steps to promote their participation in management of industrial undertakings. [18] Also, the State shall endeavour to secure a uniform civil code for all citizens,[19] and provide free and compulsory education to all children till they attain the age of 14 years.[20] This directive regarding education of children was added by the 86th Amendment Act, 2002.[21] It should and work for the economic and educational upliftment of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other weaker sections of the society.[22] The directive principles commit the State to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health, particularly by prohibiting intoxicating drinks and drugs injurious to health except for medicinal purposes.[23] It should also organise agriculture and animal

husbandry on modern and scientific lines by improving breeds and prohibiting slaughter of cows, calves, other milch and draught cattle[24][25] It should protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wild life of the country.[26] This directive, regarding protection of forests and wildlife was added by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976.[27] Protection of monuments, places and objects of historic and artistic interest and national importance against destruction and damage,[28] and separation of judiciary from executive in public services[29] are also the obligations of the State as laid down in the directive principles. Finally, the directive principles, in Article 51 ensure that the State shall strive for the promotion and maintenance of international peace and security, just and honourable relations between nations, respect for international law and treaty obligations, as well as settlement of international disputes by arbitration.[30] Implementation The State has made and is making many efforts to implement the Directive Principles. The Programme of Universalisation of Elementary Education and the five-year plans has been accorded the highest priority in order to provide free education to all children up to the age of 14 years. The 86th constitutional amendment of 2002 inserted a new article, Article 21-A, into the Constitution, that seeks to provide free and compulsory education to all children aged 6 to 14 years.[21] Welfare schemes for the weaker sections are being implemented both by the Central and State governments. These include programmes such as boys' and girls' hostels for scheduled castes' or scheduled tribes' students.[31] The year 1990-1991 was declared as the "Year of Social Justice" in the memory of B.R. Ambedkar.[32] The government provides free textbooks to students belonging to scheduled castes or scheduled tribes pursuing medicine and engineering courses. During 2002-2003, a sum of Rs. 4.77 crore was released for this purpose.[33] In order that scheduled castes and scheduled tribes are protected from atrocities, the Government enacted the The Prevention of Atrocities Act, which provided severe punishments for such atrocities.[34] Several Land Reform Acts were enacted to provide ownership rights to poor farmers. [35] Up to September 2001, more than 20,000,000 acres (80,000 km) of land had been distributed to scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and the landless poor. The thrust of banking policy in India has been to improve banking facilities in the rural areas.[ The Minimum Wages Act of 1948 empowers government to fix minimum wages for employees engaged in various employments.[37] The Consumer Protection Act of 1986 provides for the better protection of consumers. The act is intended to provide simple, speedy and inexpensive redressal to the consumers' grievances, award relief and compensation wherever appropriate to the consumer.The Equal Remuneration Act of 1976, provides for equal pay for equal work for both men and women.[ The Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojana was launched in 2001 to attain the objective of gainful employment for the rural poor. The programme was implemented through the Panchayati Raj institutions Panchayati Raj now covers almost all states and Union territories. One-third of the total number of seats have been reserved for women in Panchayats at every level; in the case of Bihar, half the seats have been reserved for women.Legal aid at the expense of the State has been made compulsory in all cases pertaining to criminal law, if the accused is too poor to engage a lawyer. Judiciary has been separated from the executive in all the states and Union territories except Jammu and Kashmir and Nagaland. India's Foreign Policy has also to some degree been influenced by the DPSPs. India has in the past condemned all acts of aggression and has also supported the United Nations peacekeeping activities. By 2004, the Indian Army had participated in 37 UN peace-keeping operations. India played a key role in the passing of a UN resolution in 2003, which envisaged

better cooperation between the Security Council and the troop-contributing countries. India has also been in favour of nuclear disarmament. Amendments Changes in Directive Principles require a Constitutional amendment which has to be passed by a special majority of both houses of the Parliament. This means that an amendment requires the approval of two-thirds of the members present and voting. However, the number of members voting should not be less than the simple majority of the house whether the Lok Sabha or Rajya Sabha.

Article 31-C, inserted into the Directive Principles of State Policy by the 25th Amendment Act of 1971 seeks to upgrade the DPSPs If laws are made to give effect to the Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights, they shall not be invalid on the grounds that they take away the Fundamental Rights. Article 45, which ensures Provision for free and compulsory education for children,was added by the 86th Amendment Act, 2002 Article 48-A, which ensures Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wild life,[26] was added by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS& OTHER CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS TO MASS MEDIA Freedom of the press is included in the wider freedom of expression mentioned in Article 19 (1) (a) of the Indian constitution. Cases that ruled so are: Express Newspapers Vs Union of India Case, 1958 Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. Vs Union of India, 1962 Romesh Thappar Vs State of Madras, 1950 Freedom of expression means the freedom to express Ones own feelings Views of others By any means

Censorship In the Brij Bhushan Vs State of Delhi, 1950, the Supreme Court ruled against precensorship. 1951: First Amendment Act included public order as a reasonable restriction for 19 (1) (a) Censorship could be imposed for a limited period in the interests of: Maintenance of public order Decency and morality (mainly cinema)

Freedom of press in India:

is not absolute press does not enjoy any special privileges The press therefore not immune from i. Ordinary forms of taxation ii. Application of general laws relating to industrial relations iii. The regulation of the conditions of services of its employees

Restrictions for the State: State cannot subject Press to laws that will infringe upon Art 19 (1) (a) or which would curtail circulation Cannot put prohibitive/ excessive burdens that will restrict circulation Cannot impose specific tax deliberately to restrict circulation Cannot fix prices (subscription) Cannot give circulation upper limit

In the Romesh Thappar Vs State of Madras, 1950, the Supreme Court ruled: Without liberty of circulation, the publication would be of little value Supreme Court annulled the Newspaper (Price and Page) Act 1956 which limited the number of pages and number of subscribers for a newspaper.

Sources of Restrictions on the freedom of the press I. Emergency provision Article 352 of the Indian constitution provides for the suspension of fundamental rights during emergency Article 358 suspends the operation of Article 19 during emergency. Laws in contravention can be made during emergency become inoperative after emergency is lifted. Article 359 authorises President to issue an order suspending Article 32 June 26, 1975: internal emergency in India Press during emergency 1. June 25, 1975: Power supply to newspaper offices cut 2. June 26: Cabinet approves pre-censorship under Rule 48 of Defence of India Rules. Pre-censorship could be imposed in the interest of: i. Defence of India ii. Civil defence iii. Public safety iv. Maintenance of public order v. Sufficient conduct of military operations 3. Films were either censored or banned (Aandhi -banned)

4. Pre-censorship was imposed on newspapers, journals, radio, TV, telex, telegrams, news agencies, teleprinter services, foreign correspondents 5. Ad, cartoons and comic strips 6. The then PM, Indira Gandhi proposed that: i. Press Council be abolished ii. Review of advertising policy iii. Take away housing facilities of journalists iv. Deport foreign correspondents who did not toe the line 7. Foreign papers and journals critical of emergency were confiscated (Times, Newsweek)

II.

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

First C of C Act: 1926 C of C Act: 1952 C o C Act 1971, amended in 1976. C of C Act 1971: codifies concepts & terminology, codifies law laid down in many court rulings, provides definition for civil & criminal contempt. Contempt of Court is one of the reasonable restrictions mentioned in article 19(2). Sec. 2 of the contempt of courts Act 1971, defines contempt of court: means civil contempt or criminal contempt a) civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any judgement, decree, direction, order, writ (or other proceeds of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court). b) Criminal contempt means the publication (whether by words, spoken or written, or by signs or by visible representations) of any matter that (i) scandalizes or tends to scandalize, lowers or tends to lower, the authority of any court, (ii) prejudices/interferes or tends to interfere with any judicial proceeding, (iii) interferes or tends to interfere with, or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other manner. Article 129 Supreme Court shall be a court of record & shall have the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself (and of subordinate courts also)

Article 215 Every High Court shall be a court of record & shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of court for itself (& lower courts). Article 142 (2) gives SC the power to investigate & punish any contempt of itself. Article 225 High Court gives powers to investigate any contempt of itself. Contempt of court should be used carefully. Section 13 of the C of C Act, 1971, says that all contempts are not punishable; it should be such that it substantially interferes or tends substantially interferes with the due course of justice.

Freedom of press and contempt of court In Subash Chand & S.M. Aggarwal, 1984 case, the court ruled that fair & accurate report of judicial proceedings and a fair criticism of a judicial act is not contempt. In E.M.S Namboodenpad Vs. T. N. Nambiar, 1984 case, it was observed that freedom of speech shall always prevail except where contempt of court is manifested, mischievious or substantial and that Bonafide criticism cannot be seen as contempt of court.

However, in the Md. Vamin & O.P. Bansal Case, 1982, the court ruled that defence of truth or justification cannot be given by an editor in a contempt of court case procedure (as in a defamation case) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PARLIAMENTARY PRIVILEGES TO PARLIAMENT & PRESS Applies to both houses of the parliament and The state legislature Art 105 (1) and (2); and Art 194 (1) and (2) deal with freedom of speech right of publication of members

According to Clause 3 of Articles 105 and 194, the above privileges are independent of part III of the constitution.

In case of a conflict between the parliamentary privileges and fundamental rights, the former shall prevail, subject only to Arts 20-22 and 32. There are two groups of privileges: 1. Individual: Enjoyed individually by members 2. Collective: Enjoyed collectively as a House

1. Individual privileges: Freedom from arrest, during the sitting of a committee or chamber of which he is a member, upto 40 days of before and after such a meeting: Exceptions: civil cases only, can be detained under preventive detention. Exemption from attendance in court as witness/jurors, without permission of the House, when Parliament is in session Freedom of speech within the House, subject to rules framed by the House, under its power to regulate its internal affairs Exception: cannot talk against the conduct of a judge in the discharge of his duties, unless the context is a motion to remove the judge. 2. Collective privileges: Right to publish debates and proceedings, and restrain others from doing the same Right to exclude others from the House/ restrict entry Right to regulate internal affairs of the House and to decide matters arising within its walls. Right to publish parliamentary misbehaviour Right to punish members and outsiders for breach of privilege Thus each House has the power : To exclude strangers form the galleries at any time To regulate its internal affairs To punish members and outsiders for breach of its privileges in the form of admonition, reprimand, or imprisonment.

The press is not immune to parliamentary privileges. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The India Government The modern India Government was originally formed through the Constitution of India. The Constitution was approved by India's law making officials, officially

known as the Constituent Assembly, on November 26, 1949 and went into effect on January 21, 1950. The reason this important document was created such as short time ago, is becauseIndia was ruled by the British and British approved princely states for the time period prior to the constitution's creation. The government of India is officially known as the Union Government, but is also sometimes referred to as the Central Government as well. Whatever you call it; it is the powerful governing authority of the Indian union, which is made up of 28 states and seven union territories. Together, these states and union territories are known as the Republic of India. The India Government leaders are located in New Delhi, which is the capital of India. It's what Washington, DC is to the United States. Like the United States, there are three branches of the government in India that were established in order to check and balance the overall government. These three branches of government are the executive, the legislative and the judiciary branches, just like in the United States. The executive branch is led by the President; he is Head of State and either exercises his powers directly, or through officers that rank beneath him. One difference in the government of India's executive branch versus the United States executive branch is that India's also has a Prime Minister, similar to Britains. The President selects a Prime Minister that he believes will be able to successfully lead the Lok Sabha, which is the Lower House of the People in India, representing the greater population. The person selected for this important role is usually the same person that leads India's majority party. This is one of the most powerful positions in the India Government. The President also appoints the members of the Council of Ministers and he delivers instru ctive portfolios to these members based on the direction or opinion of the Prime Minister. The Council of Ministers stays in power during the President's term, but the Council of Ministers has to remain in the favor of the Lok Sabha. The President can not dismiss Council Ministers on his own because it could lead to a constitutional crisis. So, the Council of Ministers cannot be dismissed as long as they have the support of the majority in the Lok Sabha. The Legislative branch, or Parliament, includes the lower house, called the Lok Sabha, and the upper house, called the Rajya Sabha. The president works with the house to make, change and enforce policies over the Republic of India. The Lower House and the Upper House are similar to the Congress and the Senate of the United States, as far as their role to the Republic of India. The Judicial branch is lead by India's Supreme Court and it includes 21 High Courts, and numerous civil, criminal and family courts at the district level. The primary civil and criminal laws that govern India are written in the legislation of the Parliament. Indian Civil Procedure Code, Indian Penal Code, and the Criminal Procedure Code are examples of these. Each union and individual state government includes its own executive, legislative and judicial branches too. Thus, the India Government is duplicated on a more local level to the people who reside in each district of India.

India's legal system applies to both the federal and individual state governments. It's based on the English Common and Statutory Law, which was directly influenced through the British Occupation. India does accept International Court of Justice jurisdiction, with several reservations, and is now an independent nation. In recent years, India has bulked up its military weaponry and army to address China, who became its biggest threat in the region after tension between India and Pakistan recently died down. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------LEGISLATIVE The main Functions and Powers of the Indian Parliament are : Functions and Powers of the Indian Parliament The Constitution of India enumerates the powers and functions of the Indian Parliament in Chapter II of Part V of the constitution. Like the British counterpart, the Parliament of India is not a fully sovereign legislature. It does not enjoy unlimited and absolute powers like that of the British Parliament. It is a creation of the Constitution. It has no natural growth like that of the British Parliament. As it is created by the Constitution, it is bound by the provisions of the Constitution. The powers and functions of the Indian Parliament may be generalized in the following heads. While discussing these powers it should be borne in mind that they are enjoyed and exercised by both the Houses of Parliament with a few difference (a) Law making powers: The Parliament of the Union Government is competent to legislate on all matters that are enumerated in the Union List and the Concurrent List of the Constitution. In the Concurrent List, the Parliament and the State Legislatures have joint jurisdiction. However, in case of conflict over any law made under the Concurrent List, the Union Law will prevail upon the State Law provided the State Law has not received the earlier assent of the President. The Union Parliament is also competent to make law over the State List under the following circumstances:(i) When the proclamation of Emergency is in operation the Parliament can make law in any item included in the State List. In case of the declaration of President's Rule in any State under Article 356 of the Constitution, the Parliament is competent to legislate on any matter included in the State List (Article 250). (ii) In normal times when Rajya Sabha passes a resolution by two-thirds majority of its members present and voting that it is necessary in the national interest that Parliament should make law with regard to any matter enumerated in the State List, then Parliament is competent to make law in that matter for the whole or any part of India (Article 249). (iii) The Parliament is competent to legislate on any matter pertaining to the State List if such legislation is deemed necessary for the implementation of international treaties or agreements concluded with foreign States (Article 253). (iv) If the legislatures of two or more States pass a resolution to the effect that it is desirable to have a parliamentary law in any matter in the State List, then the Parliament can make law for those States (Article 252).

Except in the above-mentioned occasions, the Parliament of India is not competent to make law in the State List. If at any time, the Parliament encroaches upon the rights of the States, the Supreme Court can prevent such encroachment of the Parliament through its power of Judicial Review. The Parliament must make law in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. (b) Financial Powers: In the financial domain the Parliament is the supreme authority. Not a single paisa can be spent by the Executive without parliamentary sanction. The budget is annually prepared by the Cabinet and it is submitted for the approval of the Parliament. The Parliament also approves all proposals of the Union Government to impose taxes. Money Bills can originate only in the Lok Sabha. After they have been passed by the Lok Sabha, they are sent to the Rajya Sabha for approval. Within 14 days the Rajya Sabha is expected to give its consent. Thus the power of the Rajya Sabha is limited with regards to money Bills. Further, to keep a vigil on the way the Executive spends the money granted by the legislature, there are two Standing Committees of the Parliament. They are the Public Accounts Committee and the Estimates Committee. These two Committees exercise legislative control over the Executive on behalf of the Parliament. There are certain items of expenditure included in the Budget which are not votable in the Parliament. These items include salary of the President, the Judges of the Supreme Court, and the members of the Union Public Service Commission etc. They are charged from the Consolidated Fund of India. (c) Control over the Executive The Parliament keeps a day-to-day watch over the activities of the Executive. As ours is a parliamentary system of Government, the Executive is responsible to the Parliament for all acts of omissions and commissions. The Parliament may remove a Cabinet out of power by a vote of no confidence. It may reject a bill or a budget proposal of the Cabinet. Members of the Parliament have a right to ask questions and supplementary question to the Ministers. Any lapses or mishandling on the part of the Government can be exposed in the Parliament. Adjournment motions may be moved to discuss serious administrative lapses. Through adjournment motions, matters of public importance can be brought to the notice of the Government by the members of the Parliament. There is a Committee on ministerial assurances appointed by the Parliament to see that the promises made to the Parliament by the respective ministers are fulfilled. In this matter the Lok Sabha is more powerful than the Rajya Sabha. (d) Amending Power: The Parliament is competent to amend the Constitution. Both the Houses have equal powers so far amendment of the Constitution is concerned. A bill to amend the Constitution may originate either in the Rajya Sabha or in the Lok Sabha. Unless it is passed by both the Houses with the required majority, the amendment cannot be effective. (e) Judicial Functions The Constitution vested in the Parliament the power to impeach the President, the VicePresident, and the other High Federal Officers like the Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, Auditor-General, Members of the Public Service Commission etc. Impeachment is a judicial trial of the Parliament to remove high federal officers. While the resolution for

impeachment is moved in one House, the other House sits as a Court of Trial. Approval of both the Houses is necessary for any impeachment. Further, the Parliament possesses punitive powers to punish its members, and non-members who have broken the privileges of the House. This power is not ordinarily subject to the review of the Court. In a Parliamentary system of Government, legislative privileges are immune from judicial control. (f) Electoral Function The Parliament participates in the election of the President and the Vice-President. It also elects some of its members to various Committees of the Parliament. The Vice- President is elected by both the Houses of the Parliament. He is removable by a resolution of the Rajya Sabha agreed to by the Lok Sabha. (g) Deliberative Function: The Parliament is a forum for deliberation on questions of public importance. It also serves as a ventilating chamber of public grievances. The Parliament is a mirror of national life. Whatever happens in various parts of the country can be discussed in its forum. It is often described as "a nation in miniature". Of all the functions of the Parliament this is an important function in a democratic country. Resolutions passed by the Parliament after days of deliberation may have the force of law. The Parliament represents the consensus of public opinion in the country Churchill once described the British Parliament as "the citadel of liberty". The Parliament in India also protects the rights and liberties of the people. EXECUTIVE The tenure of the chief executive varies in different countries. In countries hereditary chiefs, the tenure is life long. But in case of elective executives the tenure from state to state. The tenure of the office of the President in India is five years and that of the U. S. A. is four years. The Austrian President is elected for six years. In Italy, France and Ireland the Pre is elected for seven years. The Chairman of the Swiss Federal Council is elected for one year. The tenure of the chief executive should neither be too long nor too short. If the is very long, the executive may become an autocrat. In case of a short-term executive continuity in policy can be maintained. So, it is desirable that the tenure of the chief ex should be four or five years. Functions of Executive In the modern state a variety of functions are performed by the executive, as stated below. 1. Administrative Function: The administration function of the executive includes the following. (a) Execution of Laws and Judicial Decision: The executive is entrusted with the responsibility to execute laws made by the legislature, and decisions of the Judiciary coming in the forms of judgements of courts. (b) Maintenance of Law and Order: Another important function of the executive is to maintain law and order. The police are mainly in change of this task.

(c) Policy-Formation: In respect of policy-making, the executive has a crucial role. It prepares the blue-print of the policy which goes to the legislature in the form of bill. The policy emerges after the bill is passed by the legislature and the head of state gives assent to it. (d) Appointment and Promotion: The political executive enjoys the power of appointment, promotion, removal and suspension of civil servants. 2. Diplomatic function: It means the conduct of foreign relations. The executive appoints diplomatic representatives to foreign states and receives representatives from them. Treaties and international conventions are negotiated and concluded by the executive, often subject to the approval of one or both houses of the legislature. 3. Military Function: The chief executive, in most of the states, is made the supreme commander of the defence forces. The power of waging war and concluding peace with any foreign state is assigned to the executive. In times of emergency and grave national crisis the chief executive may declare martial law and suspend the rights of citizens. 4. Financial and Economic Function (a) Budget-preparation: In almost all the countries, the budget or the Annual Financial Statement is prepared by the executive and presented to the legislature for approval. (b) Revenue-collection: The executive prepares the sources of revenue of the government, collects taxes, and after the approval of the budget spends money on various heads. (c) Auditing: The auditing and accounting of public expenditure are done under the supervision of the executive. (d) Economic policy: The executive determines the economic policy of the country. This policy is designed to expedite economic development and make the country self- reliant. The executive prepares plans relating to production, distribution and exchange of goods and resources. 5. Judicial Function: The chief executive has the right of pardon or clemency. He may suspend, remit or commute the sentence of a person convicted of an offence. This power is exercised in exceptional cases. In most of the states the executive officials decide administrative cases like tax evasions, industrial disputes, damages claimed against government and encroachments. This is known as 'administrative adjudication.' 6. Constituent Function:

The constitution may require certain changes. It executive which determines what changes are necessary in the constitution, and such changes. It also takes the lead in piloting those constitutional amendments. 7. Legislative Function: The following are the legislative functions of the ex (a) Law-Making: Law-making is the main function of the legislature, contribution of the executive to law-making is also significant. The executive pre legislative proposals, sends them in the form of bills to the legislature, pilots and them on the floor of the legislature and works hard for the passing of bills by the legislature. A bill passed by the legislature, however, cannot be law unless it obtains the Asser of the head of state. He has the power to veto a bill or send it back to the legislature reconsideration. (b) To summon and provoke the House: The head of state (President in A India, and King or Queen in Britain) has the power to summon and prorogue the legislature. In India, for examples, he can dissolve the lower house of the legislature recommendation of the council of ministers. (c) Promulgation of Ordinance: When the national legislature is not in session head of state can promulgate ordinances to meet exigencies. The ordinance has force as law. It has to be placed before the legislature for approval when it meets passed by the legislature, it becomes a law. (d) Delegated Legislation: For lack of time and technical competence, the le delegates the power to make detailed laws and regulations to the executive. The volume of such 'delegated legislation' has increased in recent years. 8. Welfare Function: As people have become increasingly conscious of the fact that the state has a responsibility to provide basic amenities of life to them, they are de the same and the governments, in general, are trying to meet their demand. It is the duty of the government to ensure that the people have food, clothes, shelter and access to education etc. The states are generally becoming 'welfare states'. 9. Miscellaneous Functions - The executive gives leadership to the government. It leads the legislature. It leads the party in power. It leads the nation in general, leadership to the state and represents it in various international conferences and organisations. Increase in the Functions of the Executive A review of the functions of the executive reveals that the executive is a functioning organ. C. F. Strong opines that "in spite of the vast importance of the le function in modern government, it tends to be overshadowed by the executive." A number of factors has contributed to the enormous growth in executive functions in recent time.

1. Complexities and Technicalities of Modern Life: In course of time life has been burdened with many complexities and technicalities. In order to meet this challenge, the executive needs specialized knowledge and technical competence. This has led to increase in the function of the executive. 2. Welfare of People: In most of countries, there are large number of people afflicted by poverty and deprivation. They demand prompt attention of government which feels duty-bound to take welfare measures for them. 3. Overburdened Legislature: The complex problems of the modem state require more laws with great degree of complexities and technical nature. The modem legislature consisting of amateurs does not have the time and competence to deal with complex law making. Hence the executive has assumed more power. 4. Planning: Modern state is a planned one. Planning has become an important aspect of executive activities. It has led to the growth of executive power. 5. Delegated Legislation: Modem legislature makes laws on broad outlines only. The executive makes details and therefore, its power has grown. 6. Administrative Adjudication: The role of the executive in deciding administrative cases and disputes has led to administrative adjudication. Through this, the executive has taken over some powers of the judiciary. 7. Emergency Situations: Due to collapse of law and order, natural disasters and external invasion, emergency situations may arise at different times in different parts of the country. In the last few years, terrorism has become a serious issue in several countries. It is only the executive which can tackle these problems promptly and effectively. No other branch of the government can successfully face these emergency situations. The demand for vigour, efficiency and welfare in government has given impetus to the expansion of executive power. Due to the increase in the power and functions of the executive through delegated legislation and administrative adjudication, a new kind of despotism, as Lord Hewart, a British jurist, has said, 'neo-despotism' has evolved. JUDICIARY Administration of justice is the primary function of the judiciary. However, the judiciary performs certain other function too. These functions may be judicial in character but some of these functions are non-judicial in nature. Following are some of the judicial and non-judicial functions performed by the judiciary. (1) Judicial Functions:

Firstly, when a dispute is brought before a court, it is the responsibility of the court to 'determine the facts' involved. The usual manner in which the courts determine the facts is through evidence given by the contestants. Once the facts have been established, the court proceeds to decide what law is applicable to a particular controversy or circumstance. Herein the judiciary becomes the interpreter of laws, which is the prime function of the judiciary. So the major task of the judiciary is to 'determine' the facts of laws and to apply them to particular circumstance. (2) Law-making Functions: Secondly, the judiciary while interpreting the existing laws also performs the role of lawmaker. It may sound surprising, but 'judge-made' laws are common to all systems of jurisprudence. Such occasions arise when the provisions of the existing laws may be ambiguous, or sometimes two or more laws of a particular government appear to be in conflict under a given circumstance. Herein the judiciary plays an important role in determining what the law is and when two laws apparently conflict, which shall prevail. For instance, the enunciation of the 'Doctrine of Implied Powers' by the U.S. Judiciary proved conducive to the growth of the federal government's power. However, the phraseology of the original U.S. Constitution did not provide such enormous power of the Federal Government. In this context, we fully realize the prime importance of the judiciary. (3) Guardianship of the Constitution: Thirdly, in federal States like India, the U.S.A. and Switzerland, the judiciary is the guardian of the Constitution. Chief Justice Hughes of America once said, "We are under a union but the Constitution is what the judges say it is". In federal States conflict in jurisdiction and authority frequently occurs, as there are several law making and executive authorities, each showing its power to the Constitution. In the circumstances, the judiciary becomes the umpire and regulates the legal actions of the States and Central governments. In case the laws made by any of these law-making bodies conflict with the constitutional provisions, the judiciary in the above mentioned States is empowered to declare the relevant legislation illegal. Indian courts on several occasions have declared laws of the Union as well as the State laws illegal. (4) Advisory Jurisdiction: Fourthly, some national judiciaries possess advisory jurisdiction. For instance, the President of India may seek the advice of the Supreme Court of India on any proposed legislation. However, there is no such provision in the U.S.A. The Canadian Supreme Court is also obliged under constitutional provisions to tender advice to the Governor General. (5) Protector of the Fundamental Rights: Fifthly, the judiciaries also act as the defenders of the individual's right. Such role of the judiciary is important as it prevents the individual's rights from being violated. An individual need not wait until harm is done to him. If he had, sufficient reasons to believe that attempts would be made to violate his 'rights' he could approach the courts for protection.

Then the courts would issue orders prohibiting such attempts until the rights of the parties were determined. Judiciary is the watchdog of rights and liberties of the people. In India, the Supreme Court is empowered to protect the Fundamental Rights of the citizens. (6) Supervisory Function: Sixthly, higher courts are often assigned the task of supervision over the lower courts. The Indian High Conn responsible for the supervision of their respective state judicial systems. (7) Non-Judicial Function: Lastly, the judiciary in some countries may perform a number of non-judicial functions. Courts may undertake the administration of property in cases where the ownership of property in question is in dispute. Courts also assume responsibility for handling the affairs of minor children or lunatics. Courts may be authorized to issue and cancel certain licenses. Courts also may be authorized to grant citizenship to aliens. Selection or Method of Appointment of Judges: There are certain methods by which judge are selected in various States. One method of selecting judges is through an election by the people. Such a system now prevails in certain Cantons of Switzerland. Although this method may sound highly democratic, such a method of selection of the judge is unsound. Ordinary voters are not qualified to consider the suitability of judges. Moreover, a popularly elected judge is likely to favor the party, which sponsored his election. A second method of appointing judges is through elections by legislature. This method is in vogue in Switzerland and some other States. Such a mode of appointment violates the theory of the separation of powers. Moreover, if judges are appointed in this manner, the judiciary cannot function as the guardian of the constitution. Judges elected by the legislature are not likely to declare acts of the same legislature unconstitutional. Thus, the independence and impartiality of the judges would be lost. A third method of appointing judges is by executive nomination. In India, the President of India nominates the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts. This is a satisfactory mode appointing the judges. Such appointments are generally made from and among the senior practicing lawyers. A fourth method of selecting Judges is through a competitive examination. In France, judges are selected on the basis of a competitive examination conducted try the Ministry of Justice. In India, too, judges of the lower courts such as Munsifs are selected on the basis of competitive examinations. Of all these methods, the most popular is the last mentioned mode of choosing judges, for it ensures the independence of the judiciary. Garner is of the opinion that judges should be appointed by the executive. But once appointed, the judges should be independent of the influence of the executive would hold office for life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CITIZENSHIP

The conferment of a person, as a citizen of India, is governed by Articles 5 to 11 (Part II) of Indian Constitution. The legislation related to this matter is the Citizenship Act 1955, which has been amended by the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1986, the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1992, the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2003, and the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2005. Article 9 of Indian Constitution says that a person who voluntarily acquires citizenship of any other country is no longer an Indian citizen. Also, according to The Passports Act, a person has to surrender his Indian passport, it is a punishable offense under the act if he fails to surrender the passport. Indian nationality law largely follows the jus sanguinis (citizenship by right of blood) as opposed to the jus soli (citizenship by right of birth within the territory). The President of India is termed the first Citizen of India.

History Until its Independence in 1947, India was a part of the British Empire. However, between 1 January 1949 and 25 January 1950, Indians were British subjects, by virtue of Section 18(3) of Indian Independence Act, unless they had already acquired citizenship of United Kingdom or any other country. On commencement of the Indian Constitution on 26 January 1950, the Indians were no longer British subjects. Moreover, they enjoyed the status of Commonwealth citizen (also known as aBritish subject with Commonwealth citizenship, a status which does not entitle the person to use a British passport), by virtue of their Indian citizenship and India's membership of the Commonwealth. However, a number of Indians did not acquire Indian citizenship on commencement of the Indian Constitution and retained British subject without citizenship status (which entitles a person to a British passport) unless they had acquired citizenship of another Commonwealth country. On 20 December 1961, India acquired the territories of Goa, Daman and Diu and Dadar and Nagar Haveli after the military action which were under the territories of Portugal. The French territory of Puducherry, Karaikal, Mahe and the Free town of Chandranagore, were acquired under treaty of cession with France. Sikkim was also merged with India and became a constituent state with effect from 16 May 1975. Some of the enclaves in the eastern part of India, were also acquired under border [1] agreements with Pakistan and Bangladesh respectively In order to expressly provide the citizenship for people in territories as mentioned above, the central government issued the Goa, Daman and Diu (Citizenship) Order, 1962, Dadar and Nagar Haveli (Citizenship) Order, 1962 and Citizenship (Pondicherry) Order 1962, in exercise of its powers under section 7 of the Citizenship act and for Sikkim, the President extended the Citizenship act, and the relevant rules under Article 371-F(n) of Indian Constitution. In case of acquired enclaves, that did not [1] necessitate legislative action, as that was only a border demarcation agreement. Granting of citizenship Citizenship at the commencement of the constitution of India [edit] Persons domiciled in the territory of India as on 26 November 1949 automatically became Indian citizens by virtue of operation of the relevant provisions of the Indian Constitution coming into force, and most of these constitutional provisions came into force on 26 January 1950. The Constitution of India also made provision regarding citizenship for migrants from the territories of Pakistan which had been part of India before partition. Citizenship by birth Any person born in India on or after 26 January 1950, but prior to the commencement of the 1986 Act on 1 July 1987, is a citizen of India by birth. A person born in India on or after 1 July 1987 is a citizen of India if either parent was a citizen of India at the time of the birth. Those born in India on or after 3 December

2004 are considered citizens of India only if both of their parents are citizens of India or if one parent is a citizen of India and the other is not an illegal migrant at the time of their birth. Citizenship by descent Persons born outside India on or after 26 January 1950 but before 10 December 1992 are citizens of India by descent if their father was a citizen of India at the time of their birth. Person born outside India on or after 10 December 1992 are considered as citizens of India if either of their parents is a citizen of India at the time of their birth. From 3 December 2004 onwards, persons born outside of India shall not be considered citizens of India unless their birth is registered at an Indian consulate within one year of the date of birth. In certain circumstances it is possible to register after 1 year with the permission of the Central Government. The application for registration of the birth of a minor child must be made to an Indian consulate and must be accompanied by an undertaking in writing from the parents of such minor child that he or she does not hold the passport of another country. Citizenship by registration The Central Government may, on an application, register as a citizen of India under section 5 of the Citizenship Act 1955 any person (not being an illegal migrant) if he belongs to any of the following categories: a person of Indian origin who is ordinarily resident in India for seven years before making application under section 5(1)(a) (throughout the period of twelve months immediately before making application and for six years in the aggregate in the eight years preceding the twelve months). a person of Indian origin who is ordinarily resident in any country or place outside undivided India; a person who is married to a citizen of India and is ordinarily resident in India for seven years before making an application for registration; minor children of persons who are citizens of India; a person of full age and capacity whose parents are registered as citizens of India. a person of full age and capacity who, or either of his parents, was earlier citizen of independent India, and has been residing in India for one year immediately before making an application for registration; a person of full age and capacity who has been registered as an overseas citizen of India for five years, and who has been residing in India for one year before making an application for registration. Citizenship by naturalization A foreigner who has resided in India for twelve years may naturalise as an Indian citizen. The applicant must have lived a total of 12 years in India in a period of 14 years, and must have lived in India for 12 months uninterrupted prior to applying for citizenship. Renunciation and termination of Indian citizenship[edit] Renunciation is covered in Section 8 of the Citizenship Act 1955. If an adult makes a declaration of renunciation of Indian citizenship, he loses Indian citizenship. In addition any minor child of that person also loses Indian citizenship from the date of renunciation. When the child reaches the age of eighteen, he has the right to resume Indian citizenship. The provisions for making a declaration of renunciation under Indian citizenship law require that the person making the declaration be "of full age and capacity".

Warning stamped onto Indian Passports Issued by the High Commission of India, Ottawa, Canada Termination is covered in Section 9 of the Citizenship Act, 1955. The provisions for termination are separate and distinct from the provisions for making a declaration of renunciation. Section 9(1) of the act provides that any citizen of India who by naturalisation or registration acquires the citizenship of another country shall cease to be a citizen of India. Notably, the termination provision differs from the renunciation provision because it applies to " any citizen of India" and is not restricted to adults. Indian children therefore also automatically lose their claim to Indian citizenship if at any time after birth they acquire a citizenship of another country by, for example, naturalisation or registration even if the acquisition of another citizenship was done as a result of actions by the child's parents. The acquisition of another country's passport is also deemed under the Citizenship Rules, 1956 to be voluntary acquisition of another countrys nationality. Rule 3 of Schedule III of the Citizenship Rules, 1956 states that "the fact that a citizen of India has obtained on any date a passport from the Government of any other country shall be conclusive proof of his having voluntarily acquired the citizenship of that country before that date". Again, this rule applies even if the foreign passport was obtained for the child by his or her parents, and even if possession of such a passport is required by the laws of a foreign country which considers the child to be one of its citizens (e.g., a U.S.-born child of Indian parents who is automatically deemed to be a U.S. citizen according to U.S. law, and who is therefore required by U.S. law to have a U.S. passport in order to travel abroad). It does not matter that a person continues to hold an Indian passport. This rule seemingly even applies if the foreign nationality was automatically had from birth, and thus not voluntarily acquired after birth. Persons who acquire another citizenship lose Indian citizenship from the date on which they acquire that citizenship or another country's passport. The prevailing practice at a number of British diplomatic posts, for example, is to impound and return to the Indian authorities the Indian passports of those applicants who apply for and are granted British [2] passports. Special rules exist for Indian citizens with a connection to Goa, Daman and Diu. Rule 3A of Schedule III of the Citizenship Rules, 1956 states that "Where a person, who has become an Indian Citizen by virtue of the Goa, Daman and Diu (Citizenship) Order, 1962, or the Dadra and Nagar Haveli (Citizenship) Order 1962, issued under section 7 of the Citizenship Act, 1955 (57 of 1955) holds a passport issued by the Government of any other country, the fact that he has not surrendered the said passport on or before the 19 January 1963 shall be conclusive proof of his having voluntarily acquired the citizenship of that country before that date.

On 16 February 1962, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India held in the case of Izhar Ahmad Khan Vs. Union of India that "If it is shown that the person has acquired foreign citizenship either by naturalisation or registration, there can be no doubt that he ceases to be a citizen of India in consequence of such naturalisation or registration." Overseas citizenship of India[edit]

Front Cover of an OCI Registration Certificate. Note: It may look like but it is not a passport nor does it confer actual Dual citizenship. In response to persistent demands for "dual citizenship" particularly from the diaspora in North America and other developed countries, the Overseas Citizenship of India (OCI) scheme was introduced by amending the Citizenship Act, 1955 in August 2005. The scheme was launched during the Pravasi [3] Bharatiya Divas convention at Hyderabad in 2006. Indian authorities have interpreted the law to mean a person cannot have a second country's passport simultaneously with an Indian one even in the case of a child who is claimed by another country as a citizen of that country, and who may be required by the laws of the other country to use one of its passports for foreign travel (such as a child born in the United States or in Singapore to Indian parents), and the Indian courts have given the executive branch wide discretion over this matter. Therefore, Overseas Citizenship of India is not an actual citizenship of [4] India and thus, does not amount to dual citizenship or dual nationality. Moreover, the OCI card is not a substitute for an Indian visa and therefore, the passport which displays the lifetime visa must be carried [5] by OCI holders while traveling to India. The UK government as per Annex H, Chapter 14 of the Nationality Instructions available on the UKBA [6] website 7.5 For the purposes of British nationality law, OCI is considered to be citizenship of another State."

Eligibility The Central Indian Government, on application, may register any person as an Overseas Citizen of India if the person:was a citizen of India on 26 January 1950 or at any time thereafter; or belonged to a territory that became part of India after 15 August 1947; or is the child or grandchild of a person described above; and has never been a citizen of Pakistan or Bangladesh; and has had no involvement in serious offences like drug trafficking, moral turpitude, terrorist activities or anything leading to imprisonment of more than a year. Applicant's country of citizenship allows dual citizenship (even though OCI is not strictly Indian citizenship per se). Privileges An Overseas Citizen of India will enjoy all rights and privileges available to Non-Resident Indians on a [7] parity basis excluding the right to invest in agriculture and plantation properties or hold public office. It is very important that the person carry his existing foreign passport which should include the new visa called U visa which is a multi-purpose, multiple-entry, lifelong visa. It will entitle the Overseas Citizen of India to visit the country at any time for any length of time and for any purpose. Any changes to the foreign passport, should be conveyed to the Indian Embassy, so that everything will be consistent. Overseas citizens of India will not enjoy the following rights even if resident in India: (i) the right to vote, (ii) the right to hold the offices of President, Vice-President, Judge of Supreme Court and High Court, Member of Lok Sabha, Rajya Sabha, Legislative Assembly or Council, (iii) appointment to Public Services (Government Service). Also, Overseas Citizens of India are not eligible for an Inner Line Permit, and they have to apply for a protected area permit if they want to visit certain areas in India. Though not actual dual citizenship, the privileges afforded by acquiring an OCI card is that now multinational companies are finding it simpler to hire the OCI cardholders, who enjoy a multiple entry, multipurpose lifelong visa to visit India. The card provides a lifelong visa to the holder, sparing them the need to obtain separate work permits. OCI holders are treated on par with NRIs for economic, financial and educational matters and only dont have political rights and rights to buy agricultural and plantation [8] properties or hold public office. They are also exempt from registration with the Foreigners Regional Registration Officer (FRRO) on their arrival in the country and can stay or live for as long as they wish. OCI cardholders can travel at very short notice and take up assignments in India, while others could get caught up in bureaucratic delays over their employment visa. Many companies are following an active policy of moving PIOs to India for business expansion. Indian missions overseas are witnessing a deluge in OCI applications, the number of OCI cards issued by consulates around the world have been steadily rising with several Indian consulates [9] grappling with a huge backlog of applications. Effect on granting British citizenship Acquiring Overseas citizenship of India prevents British nationals (Overseas) from registering as full British citizens under Section 4B of the British Nationality Act of 1981 (which requires that nationals have [citation needed] no other citizenship in order to register). It does not prevent them from acquiring full British citizenship by a different method and it does not revoke their British citizenship if they have already [10][11] registered under Section 4B.

Persons of Indian origin (PIO) card

Front cover of a PIO card This is issued to any person currently holding foreign passport, who can prove their Indian origin up to three generations before. The same holds for spouses of Indian citizen or persons of Indian origin. Citizens of Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other countries as may be specified by the central government are [12] not eligible for grant of Persons of Indian Origin card. The PIO card must be produced alongside the foreign passport when entering or departing any port in India. Any changes in the foreign passport - name changes or passport renewal - must also be reflected in the PIO card. A PIO card is generally valid for a period of fifteen years from the date of issue. It gives the holder the following benefits: exemption from registration at a Foreigners' Regional Registration Office (FRRO) for periods of stay less than 180 days, enjoy parity with non-resident Indians in economic, financial and educational fields, acquire, hold, transfer, or dispose of immovable properties in India, except for agricultural properties, open rupee bank accounts, lend in rupees to Indian residents, and make investments in India etc., being eligible for various housing schemes under the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) or the central or State governments, their children can obtain admission in educational institutions in India in the general category quota for non-resident Indians.

Possession of a PIO card will not entitle the holder to: being eligible for the exercise of any political rights visit restricted or protected areas without permission undertake mountaineering, research, and missionary work without permission.

In early 2011, the Prime Minister of India, Manmohan Singh, announced that the Person of Indian [13] Origin card will be merged with the Overseas Citizen of India card. This new card is proposed to be [14] called the Overseas Indian Card.