ARTICLE 14

234. In M. Nagaraj and others v. Union of India and others 86, it has
been held:- ―The gravamen of Article 14 is equality of treatment. Article
14 confers a personal right by enacting a prohibition which is absolute.
By judicial decisions, the doctrine of classification is read into Article 14.
Equality of treatment under Article 14 is an objective test. It is not the
test of intention. Therefore, the basic principle underlying Article 14 is
that the law must operate equally on all persons under like
circumstances.‖
235. In E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu and another 87, this Court
observed that equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and
dimensions and it cannot be "cribbed, cabined and confined" within traditional
and doctrinaire limits. It was further held that equality is antithetic to
arbitrariness, for equality and arbitrariness are sworn enemies; one belongs to
the rule of law in a republic while the other, to the whim and caprice of an
absolute monarch
In E P Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu55, the validity of state action was
made subject to the test of arbitrariness:
55 (1974) 4 SCC 3
“Equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and dimensions and it cannot be “cribbed
cabined and confined” within traditional and doctrinaire limits. From a positivistic point of view,
equality is antithetic to arbitrariness. In fact equality and arbitrariness are sworn enemies; one
belongs to the rule of law in a republic while the other, to the whim and caprice of an absolute
monarch. Where an act is arbitrary it is implicit in it that it is unequal both according to political
logic and constitutional law and is therefore violative of Art.14…”

Per contra, the presence of this Section in its present form has resulted
in a distasteful and objectionable
collateral effect whereby even ‗consensual acts‘, which are neither
harmful to children nor women and are performed by a certain class of
people (LGBTs) owning to some inherent characteristics defined by their
identity and individuality, have been woefully targeted. This
discrimination and unequal treatment meted out to the LGBT community
as a separate class of citizens is unconstitutional for being violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution. Four decades later, the test has been
refined in
Shayara Bano v. Union of India56:
“The expression ‘arbitrarily’ means: in an unreasonable manner, as fixed or done
capriciously or at pleasure, without adequate determining principle, not founded in the
nature of things, non-rational, not done or acting according to reason or judgment,
depending on the will alone.”