Delhi Internet shutdown during CJP protest: Where does the law stand? | Explained

* The Supreme Court of India, in its landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs Union of India (2017), declared that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right enshrined in the Constitution of India. * The court held that this right is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty. *  Article 21: States that 'No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.' The court interpreted 'personal liberty' broadly to include various aspects of privacy. _While the other options are fundamental rights, they are not directly where the Right to Privacy is placed:_ * Article 15: Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth. * Article 16: Guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. * Article 19: Guarantees certain freedoms like speech and expression, assembly, etc.

The right to privacy in India is not explicitly mentioned in a single article of the Constitution. However, it is considered an intrinsic part of the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21. This recognition came about through a landmark Supreme Court judgment in 2017, K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) vs Union of India. The court ruled that the right to privacy is an inseparable part of the right to life and personal liberty, and is protected under Article 21.

Article 21: This article states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has expanded the scope of personal liberty to include various fundamental rights, including the right to marry a person of one's choice. Shamima Begum vs. State of Assam (2018): The court ruled that a woman has the right to marry a person of her choice, reinforcing that personal decisions related to marriage fall under individual autonomy and personal liberty as guaranteed by Article 21. Hadiya's case (Shafin Jahan vs. Asokan K.M): The Supreme Court upheld the right to marry as a fundamental right under Article 21. It ruled that an adult woman is free to make decisions regarding her marriage, rejecting attempts to interfere in personal choices. The court emphasized that state or societal disapproval cannot restrict an individual’s right to marry.

* The First Amendment Act, of 1951, added the fourth clause to Article 15 that empowered the government to make any law for the upliftment of socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled * Tribes. The added clause elucidates that in case such special provisions are introduced, they cannot be said to be breaching Article 15 and Article 29(2) of the Constitution. * The need to insert this clause was felt after the decision of the Supreme Court in the State of Madras v. Srimathi Champakam (1951). According to the facts of this case, the Madras government issued an Order that provided reservation on the grounds of religion, race, and caste. This Order was contended to be in breach of Article 15(1) of the Indian Constitution. The Court also gave a literal interpretation to the constitutional provisions and held that reserving seats in public institutions for backward classes violates Articles 15(1) and 29(2). Therefore, to nullify the effect of similar judicial pronouncements, Article 15 was amended. * Similarly, Article 19(1)(a) grants the right to free speech and expression to Indian citizens. This right is considered an essential feature of democracy. However, Article 19(2) specifies the restrictions that can curtail this freedom. The First Amendment to the Indian Constitution altered these restrictions by widening their ambit. The second change, via the Amendment Act of 1951, was made to Clause 6 of Article 19. Note: UPSC deleted this question when the final answer key was issued.

* The legislation described would violate Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. * Article 14 guarantees Equality Before Law and Equal Protection of Laws. This means that laws must be applied fairly and consistently, and everyone should be treated equally under the law. * Legislation that gives unchecked power to the executive or administration to apply the law violates this principle. Option B is incorrect. Article 28 is related to the right to freedom of religion. Option C is incorrect. Article 32 confers the right to remedies for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen. Article 32 affirms the right to move the Supreme Court if a fundamental right is violated. Under this article, the Supreme Court can issue writs for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights of the citizens. Option D is incorrect. Article 44 provides for one of the Directive Principles of State Policy. Article 44 says that the State shall endeavor to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India.

Article 13 of the Indian Constitution provides for the protection of Fundamental Rights and declares that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of Part III of the Constitution shall be void to the extent of the inconsistency. To prevent the State from bypassing Fundamental Rights through executive or traditional means, Article 13(3)(a) provides a highly expansive definition of the term "law". It explicitly states that "law" includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law. Therefore, the view of 'Y' that the term 'law' includes custom or usage is absolutely correct. Because "custom or usage" is expressly listed in the constitutional text, uncodified traditional practices that hold the force of law are subject to the exact same constitutional scrutiny as formal legislative statutes. 'X' is incorrect in doubting or rejecting the inclusion of custom or usage within the definition of law under Article 13. Thus, regarding the point of contention, only the view of 'Y' is correct. Therefore, the correct option is D.

A custodian is a person entrusted with the custody or care of something. - Whenever Fundamental Rights are denied or restricted, it can be challenged in the Supreme Court under Article 32; - The dispute between Centre and State can be settled in the Supreme Court under Article 131; - the Law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all the courts in India under Article 141; - For the enforcement of decrees - Article 142; - President of India consulting Supreme Court under Article 143; - After all, under Article 13, all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of any of the fundamental rights shall be void ( Doctrine of Judicial Review). - Supreme Court judgments are the law of the land; Based on the above facts, the Supreme Court takes care of the Constitution. So, simply the Supreme Court is the Custodian of the Constitution.

Untouchability is a form of discrimination that violates the principle of equality among citizens, regardless of caste. To uphold this principle, Article 17 of the Constitution explicitly abolishes untouchability, making it one of the five rights under the broader Right to Equality (Articles 14-18). Therefore, the correct answer is option D.

Right to Privacy and Article 21: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. In the landmark 2017 judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India unanimously held that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21. This ruling reinforced privacy as a fundamental right, ensuring protection against unwarranted state and private intrusions. Part III of the Constitution covers Fundamental Rights, which include: - Article 19: Right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of movement, and other essential liberties. - Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty, which now includes privacy after the Puttaswamy judgment. Article 14: Ensures equality before the law, but does not explicitly deal with privacy. Article 17: Abolishes untouchability. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are non-enforceable guidelines, not fundamental rights. Article 24: Prohibits child labor but has no relation to privacy. Thus, the right to privacy is most closely linked to Article 21 and the freedoms guaranteed in Part III of the Indian Constitution. Hence the correct answer is option (c).

* Statement 1 is correct: According to Article 355 of the Indian Constitution, it shall be the duty of the Union to protect every State against external aggression and internal disturbance and to ensure that the government of every State is carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. * Statement 2 is correct: Article 22(3)(b) mentions that individuals detained under preventive detention laws are not initially entitled to consult or be defended by a legal practitioner until the grounds of detention are disclosed to them. Although the constitution allows for exceptions in preventive detention cases, it does not prohibit state governments from providing legal counsel to the detained person. The state has the discretion to offer legal assistance if it wishes. * Statement 3 is incorrect: Section 32(1) of POTA 2002 allows confessions made to a police officer of at least Superintendent rank, overriding certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act.

The Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017, framed under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, is the primary legal basis for internet shutdowns in India. While Section 144 of CrPC has been used in some instances, the Telegraph Act rules provide the specific framework for telecom service suspension.

In the Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) case, the Supreme Court explicitly declared that the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) and the right to carry on any trade or business under Article 19(1)(g) would include the right to disseminate and receive information and to carry on trade and business through the internet. While Article 21 is also broadly implicated, Article 19(1)(a) is the most direct and explicit recognition in this context.

Statement 1 is incorrect: Orders for temporary suspension of telecom services can be issued by the Union Home Secretary or a State Home Secretary. Statement 2 is correct: The Anuradha Bhasin judgment (2020) emphasized transparency and judicial review for such orders. Statement 3 is correct: The article explicitly states, 'Reportedly, signal jammers had been deployed to disrupt access to the Internet during the protest.'