Article 14

Equality before law & Equal Protection of law: The State shall not deny to any person
equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

Difference between Equality before Law & Equal Protection of Laws

Equality before Law: means nobody shall be given a special treatment by virtue of his/her
Religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth and equal treatment of all the classes by the law. It is a
negative concept.

Equal Protection of Laws in Equal circumstances: It is a Positive concept. As a logical

corollary, If circumstances are unequal, unequal treatment could be provided so as to create
atleast a semblance of equality.

Therefore, the necessary corollary to article 14 would be that equals would be treated equally,
whilst un-equals would have to be treated unequally.

Sources/ Articles ensuring Equal Protection of Laws in Indian Constitution.

1. The preamble of the Constitution secures to its citizen, social, economic and political
justice.
2. Article 14 of the Constitution makes it clear that the State shall not deny to any person
equality before law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

3. Articles 38 and 39, of the Constitution of India lay down clear mandate in this regard.
According to Article 38 (1), the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by
securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social,
economic or political, shall inform all the institutions of the national life.
4. Article 39-A directs the State to ensure that the operation of the legal system promotes
justice on a basis of equal opportunity and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid by
suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing
justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
Right to free legal aid or free legal service is an essential fundamental right guaranteed by
the Constitution.

While Article 14 forbids class legislation, it permits reasonable classification of persons,

objects and transactions by the law. But the classification should not be arbitrary, artificial or
evasive. To pass the test of reasonability a particular classification must satisfy following 2
conditions:

i. that the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes

persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group; and

©Jatin Verma All Rights Reserved. https://www.jatinverma.org

 ii. that that differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the
statute in question.

Class legislation makes an improper discrimination by conferring particular privileges upon a

class of persons and is forbidden under article 14.

The ‘doctrine of reasonable classification’ states that any state action can stand the test of
Article 14 even when it differentiates people but such differentiation has to stand the test of
reasonability.

Where the classification is unreasonable, a law or state action will be held invalid on the grounds
of arbitrariness.

Issue of Triple talaq

One of the grounds on which triple talaq was held invalid was violation of article 14.

The judges hold that the practice of triple talaq violates Article 14 of the constitution for being
manifestly arbitrary.

This practice was manifestly arbitrary because the marital tie can be broken capriciously and
whimsically by a Muslim man without any attempt at reconciliation so as to save it.

The doctrine of manifest arbitrariness allows the striking down of a law under Article 14 on
account of being capricious, irrational, disproportionate or excessive. It makes the classification
unreasonable.

The arbitrariness doctrine is a well-accepted tenet of determining the scope of Article 14, where
it provides a guarantee against arbitrary State action, whether exercised under authority of law or
in exercise of executive power without making of law.

Issue of Adultery

In August, 2018, SC held that the Indian Penal Code's section 497 on adultery violates the
fundamental Right to Equality as it treats married men and women differently.

As per the judgement, this section of IPC failed the test of "discretion and manifest
arbitrariness”.

Section 377

One of the grounds provided by SC for decriminalisation of homosexuality was that It violates
the right to equal opportunity given under Article 14 of the Constitution.

©Jatin Verma All Rights Reserved. https://www.jatinverma.org

 Citizenship amendment bill (CAB)

Government in its defence of providing citizenship to the 6 migrated non-Muslim minorities

from neighbouring countries has put forward its rationale that

 Under article 14, a legislature is entitled to make reasonable classification for purposes of
legislation and treat all in one class on equal footing.
 Bill encompasses the “positive concept of equality” that entails “equality of treatment
in equal circumstances.

©Jatin Verma All Rights Reserved. https://www.jatinverma.org