Join our Law Notes WhatsApp Group and stay updated with Legal and Judicial Updates
Article 15 of Constitution of India
Article 15 of Constitution of India deals with Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
From the Constitution
(2) No citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to—
(a) access to shops, public restaurants, hotels and places of public entertainment; or
(b) the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
(3) Nothing in this article shall prevent the State from making any special provision for women and children.
[(4) Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.]
[(5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30.]
- Clause (1) specifies the prohibited grounds in any matter in which the State has exclusive control.
- Clause (2) specifies the prohibited grounds in any matter in which the State and even private individuals have exclusive control.
- Clause (3) enables the government to make special provisions for the protection of women and children.
- A discrimination 'only' on any of the above mentioned grounds is invalid. However, there can be a discrimination on any of the above mentioned grounds and also on other grounds not mentioned above is considered valid.
- 'Place of public resort' includes a public park, public road, public bus, ferry, public urinals, railways, hospital etc.
- In Clause (3), provisions 'for' the women could be made and not 'against' the women. Further, provisions in favor of women and against men are valid but provisions in favor of men and against women are invalid.
- Clause (4) is an enabling clause and confers discretion to the State on the use of these provisions. Hence these are not obligatory to the State to take action under it.
Related Cases / Recent Cases / Case Laws
- Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust and Others v Union of India and Others Writ Petition 416 OF 2012, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition No 416 OF 2012, Supreme Court of India judgement dated May 6, 2014
- Ram Singh and Others v Union of India Writ Petition 274 OF 2014, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition No 274 OF 2014, Supreme Court of India judgement dated March 17, 2015
- Trichy Main Road, Villupuram v The Principal Secretary To Government Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department and Others, Judgement delivered on 15 September, 2010
- Nainsuphdas v State of UP: Conducting elections solely based on the religion of the voter is invalid.
- State of Rajasthan v Pratap Singh: Collecting cost for deploying additional police force stationed in the area and exempting Harijans and Muslims from such collections is invalid.
- D P Joshi v State of Madhya Bharat, AIR 1960 SC 1208: Medical College Rules provided that non-residents of the state where
the college was located would have to pay a capitation fee for admission, whereas residents would not. The court held that the discrimination was based on place of residence, and not on place of birth, and therefore, it did not violate A.15(1).
- Voluntary Health Association of Punjab v Union of India and Others, Extraordinary Civil Writ Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No 1 OF 2006, Supreme Court of India judgement dated March 4, 2013
- Abuzar Hossain @ Gulam Hossain Vs State of West Bengal, Criminal Appeal No. 1193 OF 2006, Supreme Court of India judgement delivered on October 8, 2012
- Bhartiya Seva Samaj Trust Tr Pres and Another Vs Yogeshbhai Ambalal Patel and Another, Civil Appeal No: 6463 of 2012; Supreme Court Judgement dated September 14, 2012
- State of AP v P B Vijay Kumar: State rules that allow direct recruitment of women are held valid.
- Yusuf Abdul Aziz v State of Bombay: Adultery committed in consent of the women is considered a crime by the adulterer and not the adulteress. She is not held liable even as abettor.