Every Short Answer on this site is written in plain language by the site's author, who is not a lawyer, and marked "not yet lawyer-reviewed". A qualified advocate's review is the next step. If that is you, this is the ask.
There are 90 Short Answers awaiting review, each a plain-language summary of what the Constitution of India says on a common question, with the exact articles cited. Please check them for legal accuracy: claims that are wrong or overstated, missing caveats, and citations that do not support the sentence. The verbatim constitutional text is separate and authoritative; it is the plain-language summaries that need a legal eye.
The 90 Short Answers not yet reviewed, exactly as they appear on the site. Read them here; use "Flag this answer" on any that need attention to jump to the form with it pre-selected.
No. Article 22 says anyone who is arrested must be told the grounds of arrest as soon as possible, has the right to consult a lawyer of their choice, and must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours. Preventive detention laws are the exception, and even those have their own limits written into the same article.
Cites: Article 22 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression. It is not absolute: Article 19(2) lets the state impose reasonable restrictions on grounds like security of the state, public order, decency, defamation, and contempt of court.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Article 19(2) lists them: sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation, and incitement to an offence. A restriction must be "reasonable" and must fall under one of these heads, otherwise it is unconstitutional.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, peaceful protest is protected. Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, and Article 19(1)(a) protects freedom of speech and expression; together they cover peaceful demonstrations. These rights are not absolute: Article 19(2) and 19(3) allow reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order and the sovereignty and integrity of India, and the protection does not extend to an assembly that turns violent or is armed.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Not by the state. Article 15 prohibits discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth, and it also covers access to shops, restaurants, wells, tanks, and roads. The same article allows special provisions for women, children, and socially and educationally backward classes.
Cites: Article 15 Flag this answer ↗
Article 14 promises every person, citizen or not, equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws. The state can treat different groups differently only if the classification is reasonable, not arbitrary.
Cites: Article 14 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, absolutely. Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form, and it makes enforcing any disability arising from it a punishable offence. It sits in the Fundamental Rights chapter, so no ordinary law can ever take it away.
Cites: Article 17 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 25 guarantees everyone freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion, subject to public order, morality, and health. Articles 26 to 28 add the rights to manage religious affairs and to not be taxed or forcibly instructed in any religion.
Cites: Article 25, Article 26 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 19(1)(d) and (e) give every citizen the right to move freely throughout the territory of India and to reside and settle in any part of it. Reasonable restrictions are allowed only in the general public interest or to protect Scheduled Tribes.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Article 22 is your shield: you must be told why you are being arrested, you can consult and be defended by a lawyer of your choice, and you must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. Article 20 adds that you cannot be forced to testify against yourself or be punished twice for the same offence.
Cites: Article 22, Article 20 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 32 gives you the right to move the Supreme Court directly to enforce your fundamental rights, and the Court can issue writs like habeas corpus and mandamus. This article has been called the heart and soul of the Constitution, and it is itself a fundamental right.
Cites: Article 32 Flag this answer ↗
Article 21 says no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The Supreme Court has read it expansively over the decades to include dignity, livelihood, health, and a clean environment, making it the most litigated sentence in Indian law.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, but you will not find the word "privacy" in the text. In the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment, a nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court held that privacy is a fundamental right flowing from Article 21's guarantee of life and personal liberty. That is judge-made law built on this article.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, for children. Article 21A, added by the 86th Amendment in 2002, requires the state to provide free and compulsory education to all children aged six to fourteen. Article 45 directs the state to also care for children below six.
Cites: Article 21A Flag this answer ↗
Only by authority of law. Article 300A says no person shall be deprived of property save by authority of law. Property was originally a fundamental right, but the 44th Amendment in 1978 moved it out of Part III, so you can no longer go straight to the Supreme Court under Article 32 for it.
Cites: Article 300A Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 352 lets the President proclaim a national Emergency on grounds of war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. During it, Article 358 suspends Article 19 freedoms and Article 359 lets the President suspend the right to move courts for other rights. After the Emergency of 1975, the 44th Amendment made sure Articles 20 and 21 can never be suspended.
Cites: Article 352, Article 359 Flag this answer ↗
Under Article 356, if the President is satisfied that a state's government cannot be carried on in accordance with the Constitution, the Union can take over the state's executive and Parliament can take over its legislature. Every such proclamation must be approved by Parliament and normally cannot last beyond three years.
Cites: Article 356 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, under Article 368, usually by a two-thirds majority of each House, and for federal provisions also ratification by half the state legislatures. But the Supreme Court's basic structure doctrine, from the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case, holds that Parliament cannot destroy the Constitution's basic features. That limit is judge-made, not in the text.
Cites: Article 368 Flag this answer ↗
No, and the Constitution says so openly. Article 37 states the Directive Principles shall not be enforceable by any court, while still calling them fundamental in the governance of the country. They are instructions to the state, not rights you can sue on. This surprises most people.
Cites: Article 37 Flag this answer ↗
Article 75 says the Prime Minister is appointed by the President, and the other ministers are appointed on the Prime Minister's advice. The council of ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha, and a minister who is not a member of Parliament for six consecutive months must stop being a minister.
Cites: Article 75 Flag this answer ↗
Article 124 says Supreme Court judges are appointed by the President after consultation with judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts. In practice, the Supreme Court's own judgments turned "consultation" into the collegium system, where senior judges effectively choose. Judges hold office until age 65 and can be removed only by impeachment.
Cites: Article 124 Flag this answer ↗
Sedition is not in the Constitution. It comes from the colonial-era penal code, Section 124A IPC. Any speech restriction, including sedition, must survive Article 19(2)'s test of being a reasonable restriction on one of the listed grounds. The Supreme Court in Kedar Nath (1962) narrowed sedition to incitement to violence, and its use has been paused by the Court since 2022.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Only within Article 19(2)'s limits. Blocking speech online is still a restriction on freedom of expression, so it must be a reasonable restriction on grounds like security of the state or public order, imposed by law. The Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin (2020) held that indefinite internet shutdowns are impermissible.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Article 19(1)(b) guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms. The state can impose reasonable restrictions in the interests of public order or the sovereignty and integrity of India, which is why assemblies can be regulated but not banned outright.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
The text of the Constitution does not mention the internet. But in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court held that freedom of speech and the freedom to carry on trade through the internet are protected under Article 19. That protection is judge-made law resting on this article.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
If you are arrested, Article 22 requires the police to tell you the grounds, let you consult a lawyer of your choice, and produce you before a magistrate within 24 hours. Article 20 protects you from being forced to be a witness against yourself, and Article 21 requires any deprivation of liberty to follow a procedure established by law.
Cites: Article 22, Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Not in so many words. The Supreme Court has read the right to food into Article 21's right to life, and Article 47 makes raising nutrition levels one of the state's primary duties, though as a Directive Principle it is not enforceable in court. The National Food Security Act of 2013 turned much of this into statutory rights.
Cites: Article 21, Article 47 Flag this answer ↗
Sort of. Article 19(1)(g) guarantees every citizen the right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Playing cricket for a living is a profession. So yes, technically.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
It is in there. Article 48 directs the state to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and to take steps to prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves, and other milch and draught cattle. It is a Directive Principle, so it guides state policy but is not enforceable in court.
Cites: Article 48 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 47 directs the state to endeavour to bring about prohibition of intoxicating drinks and drugs that are injurious to health. It is a Directive Principle, which is why states like Gujarat and Bihar can and do enforce prohibition while others do not.
Cites: Article 47 Flag this answer ↗
The words "socialist" and "secular" were not in the original 1949 Preamble. They were inserted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, during the Emergency. Indian courts have read "socialist" loosely, as a commitment to reducing inequality rather than state ownership, and the insertion remains politically contested to this day.
Cites: Preamble Flag this answer ↗
Your state government. Police and public order are entries in the State List of the Seventh Schedule, so state legislatures make police laws and state governments run the force. The centre controls central agencies like the CBI and paramilitary forces, and Delhi is the exception, where police report to the central government.
Cites: Article 246 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, on paper. The 106th Amendment in 2023 added Article 330A, reserving one-third of Lok Sabha seats for women, and Article 332A does the same for state assemblies. Article 334A holds the catch: the reservation only takes effect after a delimitation exercise based on the first census conducted after 2023, so it has not applied to an election yet.
Cites: Article 330A, Article 334A Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution does not list rights by role, but several provisions protect women and mothers. Article 15 bars discrimination on the ground of sex and, in Article 15(3), lets the state make special provisions for women and children. Article 42 directs the state to secure just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief. Article 39 asks the state to protect the health of workers and the tender age of children. Article 15 is a Fundamental Right; Articles 42 and 39 are Directive Principles, meant to guide policy rather than be enforced directly in court.
Cites: Article 15, Article 42, Article 39 Flag this answer ↗
Children get specific protection. Article 21A makes free and compulsory education a Fundamental Right for every child aged six to fourteen. Article 24 bans employing any child below fourteen in a factory, mine, or other hazardous work. Article 23 forbids forced labour and trafficking. Article 39 directs the state to protect children against abuse and their tender age against exploitation, and Article 15(3) allows special provisions for children.
Cites: Article 21A, Article 24, Article 39 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution's labour protections split in two. Article 23 bans forced labour and Article 24 bans employing children in hazardous work; both are Fundamental Rights you can enforce in court. The rest are Directive Principles that guide policy rather than bind courts: Article 39 seeks fair wages, equal pay for equal work, and humane conditions, and Article 41 speaks to the right to work and to public assistance in unemployment, old age, and sickness.
Cites: Article 23, Article 24, Article 39, Article 41 Flag this answer ↗
Article 23 prohibits human trafficking, begar, and other forms of forced labour, and makes any breach an offence punishable by law. Article 24 bars employing any child below fourteen in a factory, mine, or other hazardous work. Both are Fundamental Rights, so they can be enforced directly in court.
Cites: Article 23, Article 24 Flag this answer ↗
Article 29 lets any group with a distinct language, script, or culture conserve it, and bars denial of admission to state-aided schools on the ground only of religion, race, caste, or language. Article 30 gives religious and linguistic minorities the right to establish and administer their own educational institutions. Both are Fundamental Rights.
Cites: Article 29, Article 30 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution allows reservation but does not by itself create it. Article 15 lets the state make special provisions for socially and educationally backward classes and for Scheduled Castes and Tribes, including in education. Article 16 allows reservation in public employment for backward classes not adequately represented. Article 46 directs the state to promote the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections. The details are set by law and have been shaped heavily by Supreme Court judgments.
Cites: Article 15, Article 16, Article 46 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution does not mention sexual orientation, but its guarantees have been read to protect it. Article 14 promises equality before the law, Article 15 bars discrimination on the ground of sex, and Article 21 protects life and personal liberty, which the courts have read to include dignity and privacy. The reading of these articles to decriminalise consensual same-sex relations came through Supreme Court judgments, not from the text itself.
Cites: Article 14, Article 15, Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution does not create a specific Fundamental Right for the elderly. Article 41, a Directive Principle, asks the state to provide public assistance in old age, sickness, and disablement within the limits of its economic capacity. The general equality guarantee of Article 14 applies to everyone. Most concrete protections for older people come from statutes rather than the Constitution.
Cites: Article 41, Article 14 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution does not list disability as a separate Fundamental Right. Article 41, a Directive Principle, asks the state to provide public assistance in cases of disablement within its economic capacity. The general equality guarantees of Articles 14, 15, and 16 apply to everyone. The detailed rights of persons with disabilities come mainly from statute, notably the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
Cites: Article 41, Article 14 Flag this answer ↗
Article 51A lists eleven Fundamental Duties, added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976. They include respecting the Constitution, the flag, and the national anthem, cherishing the freedom struggle, protecting the sovereignty and unity of India, promoting harmony, preserving the culture and the environment, developing a scientific temper, safeguarding public property, and providing education to one's child. They are moral obligations, not directly enforceable in court, though courts read them alongside the Fundamental Rights.
Cites: Article 51A Flag this answer ↗
Article 326 sets elections to the Lok Sabha and the state assemblies on universal adult suffrage: every citizen who is eighteen or older, and not otherwise disqualified by law for reasons such as unsoundness of mind or certain crimes, has the right to vote. The voting age was lowered from twenty-one to eighteen by the 61st Amendment in 1988. The right to vote is a constitutional and legal right defined by statute, not one of the Fundamental Rights.
Cites: Article 326 Flag this answer ↗
Articles 5 to 11 deal with citizenship. Articles 5 to 9 fixed who was a citizen when the Constitution began in 1950, and Article 11 gives Parliament full power to make laws on acquiring and losing citizenship. Parliament did that through the Citizenship Act, 1955, so the day-to-day rules on citizenship by birth, descent, registration, or naturalisation come from that statute rather than directly from the Constitution.
Cites: Article 5, Article 11 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, as part of free speech. The Supreme Court has read the right to information into Article 19(1)(a), reasoning that citizens cannot speak or participate meaningfully without access to information, especially about their government. The machinery for using it, filing a request and getting a reply, comes from the Right to Information Act, 2005, a statute rather than the constitutional text.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, but tightly limited. The Supreme Court in Bachan Singh (1980) held that capital punishment does not violate the right to life under Article 21, provided it is imposed only in the rarest of rare cases and after a fair procedure. It survives as a constitutional but exceptional punishment, not the norm.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Only in a narrow sense. The Supreme Court in Common Cause (2018) held that the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to die with dignity, allowing passive euthanasia and living wills for the terminally ill under strict safeguards. Active euthanasia and assisted suicide remain unlawful, and attempt to suicide has been largely decriminalised by the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, in three places. Article 48A directs the state to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife. Article 51A(g) makes protecting the natural environment a Fundamental Duty of every citizen. The Supreme Court has also read the right to a clean and healthy environment into the right to life under Article 21, which is what makes it enforceable.
Cites: Article 48A, Article 51A, Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Partly. Article 47, a Directive Principle, makes raising the level of nutrition and public health a primary duty of the state. The Supreme Court has read a right to health and to emergency medical care into the right to life under Article 21, so denial of urgent treatment can be challenged. A general enforceable right to free healthcare is not spelled out in the text.
Cites: Article 47, Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, but only lawfully. Property is no longer a Fundamental Right; the 44th Amendment in 1978 moved it to Article 300A, which says no person shall be deprived of property except by authority of law. The state can acquire land for a public purpose, but only through a valid law, and under the current land acquisition statute that means process and compensation.
Cites: Article 300A Flag this answer ↗
In limited cases, yes. Article 22 allows preventive detention, holding a person to stop a future harm rather than to punish a past crime. It carries safeguards: an advisory board reviews the detention, and it cannot ordinarily continue beyond three months without that board's approval. The ordinary arrest protections in Article 22(1) and (2), being told the grounds and seeing a lawyer, do not fully apply to preventive detention, which is why it is controversial.
Cites: Article 22 Flag this answer ↗
Article 20 gives three protections to anyone accused of an offence. You cannot be punished under a law that did not exist when the act was done, you cannot be tried and punished for the same offence twice, and you cannot be forced to be a witness against yourself. These are Fundamental Rights and apply to citizens and non-citizens alike.
Cites: Article 20 Flag this answer ↗
Through a writ. Article 32 lets you go straight to the Supreme Court when a Fundamental Right is violated, and Article 226 lets you approach a High Court for an even wider set of rights. The courts can issue writs such as habeas corpus, which orders a detained person to be produced, mandamus, which orders an authority to do its duty, and certiorari, which quashes an illegal order. Dr. Ambedkar called Article 32 the heart and soul of the Constitution.
Cites: Article 32, Article 226 Flag this answer ↗
Article 44, a Directive Principle, says the state shall endeavour to secure a Uniform Civil Code for all citizens, one common set of laws on marriage, divorce, inheritance, and adoption, in place of the religion-based personal laws that apply today. It is a goal the Constitution directs the state toward, not an enforceable right, and it has never been enacted nationally.
Cites: Article 44 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, though the words press and media do not appear. Freedom of the press is part of the freedom of speech and expression in Article 19(1)(a), as the Supreme Court has repeatedly held. Like all speech it is subject to the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2), such as public order, defamation, and the security of the state. There is no separate or higher protection for journalists in the text.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Not as a Fundamental Right. The Supreme Court has held that while Article 19(1)(c) protects the right to form unions, it does not guarantee a right to strike or even to effective collective bargaining. Any right to strike comes from industrial and labour statutes and their conditions, not from the Constitution, and it can be regulated or restricted by law.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
EWS is reservation for the economically weaker sections. The 103rd Amendment in 2019 added Article 15(6) and Article 16(6), letting the state reserve up to ten percent of seats in education and public jobs for economically weaker sections not already covered by other reservations. The Supreme Court upheld it in 2022. It is the first reservation based on economic status alone rather than social and educational backwardness.
Cites: Article 15, Article 16 Flag this answer ↗
India has no national language. Article 343 makes Hindi in the Devanagari script the official language of the Union, with English continuing as an associate official language for official purposes, and the Eighth Schedule recognises 22 scheduled languages. Official language is not the same as national language, and the Constitution never declares one.
Cites: Article 343 Flag this answer ↗
Both, along lines the Constitution draws. Article 246 and the Seventh Schedule split lawmaking into three lists: the Union List, such as defence, foreign affairs, and currency, on which only Parliament can legislate; the State List, such as police, public health, and land, for the state legislatures; and the Concurrent List, such as education, marriage, and criminal law, open to both, with central law prevailing if they clash. Subjects on no list fall to Parliament.
Cites: Article 246 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, in theory. Article 360 lets the President declare a financial emergency if the financial stability or credit of India is threatened. During it the Union can direct states on money matters and reduce the salaries of public servants, including judges. It has never been invoked in India's history, and it is distinct from a national emergency under Article 352 and President's Rule under Article 356.
Cites: Article 360 Flag this answer ↗
No. Article 1 calls India a Union of States, language the Constituent Assembly chose deliberately to signal that the Union is indestructible and no state has a right to secede. Article 3 lets Parliament form new states or change boundaries, so states can be reorganised, but a state cannot separate from the country. Advocating secession also falls outside free-speech protection, which allows restrictions for the sovereignty and integrity of India.
Cites: Article 1, Article 3 Flag this answer ↗
The Constitution was framed by the Constituent Assembly of India between 1946 and 1949, with Dr. B. R. Ambedkar as chairman of the Drafting Committee and Dr. Rajendra Prasad as President of the Assembly. It was adopted on 26 November 1949 and came into force on 26 January 1950. The original was handwritten and calligraphed by Prem Behari Narain Raizada, not printed.
Cites: Preamble Flag this answer ↗
As originally adopted in 1950 it had 395 articles, 8 schedules, and 22 parts. After decades of amendments it now runs to over 470 articles, 12 schedules, and 25 parts, though articles are still numbered up to 395 with many added as letters, such as 21A or 15A, rather than renumbered. It remains the longest written constitution of any country.
Cites: Preamble Flag this answer ↗
Yes. The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) settled that the Preamble is part of the Constitution and can be amended, though not in a way that destroys its basic structure. The 42nd Amendment in 1976 amended it to add the words socialist, secular, and integrity. It is not directly enforceable, but courts use it to read the meaning and intent of the rest.
Cites: Preamble Flag this answer ↗
No. The Constitution grants no right to bear arms. Article 19(1)(b) protects only assembly that is peaceful and without arms. Owning a firearm in India is a privilege granted by licence under the Arms Act, a statute, and it can be refused, conditioned, or revoked. There is no equivalent of a right to keep and bear arms.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
You must show respect, but you cannot be compelled to sing. In Bijoe Emmanuel (1986) the Supreme Court protected students who stood respectfully but did not sing the anthem on religious grounds, holding that forcing them would violate free speech under Article 19(1)(a) and freedom of conscience under Article 25. Respecting the anthem is a Fundamental Duty under Article 51A, but respect is not the same as forced participation.
Cites: Article 19, Article 25, Article 51A Flag this answer ↗
Not yet. In Supriyo (2023) the Supreme Court declined to grant legal recognition to same-sex marriage, holding that this is for Parliament to legislate, not for the court to create. Consensual same-sex relationships were decriminalised earlier in Navtej Johar (2018). So same-sex relationships are legal, but marriage is not recognised under current law, and the equality and liberty arguments under Articles 14, 15, and 21 remain live.
Cites: Article 21, Article 14 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 25 protects freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise, and propagate religion, which includes changing your own faith by choice. What it does not protect is conversion by force, fraud, or inducement, and several states have anti-conversion laws that regulate or require notice for religious conversion, subject to public order, morality, and health.
Cites: Article 25 Flag this answer ↗
Nothing. The Constitution names no national animal, bird, or flower. The tiger, the peacock, and the lotus are national symbols chosen by government notification, not by the constitutional text. The Constitution touches the flag and anthem only indirectly, through the Fundamental Duty in Article 51A to respect them. National symbols are matters of policy, not constitutional law.
Cites: Article 51A Flag this answer ↗
Yes. The Supreme Court has held that the right to marry a person of one's choice, across caste or religion, is part of the liberty and dignity protected by Article 21 and the equality guaranteed by Article 14. In Lata Singh (2006) and Shafin Jahan (2018) the Court protected adults who married by choice against interference by family or the state. Two consenting adults do not need anyone else's permission to marry.
Cites: Article 21, Article 14 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, as part of personal liberty. In Maneka Gandhi (1978) the Supreme Court held that the right to travel abroad is part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, and that a passport cannot be impounded without a fair, just, and reasonable procedure. The right is not absolute and can be restricted by a valid law, for example during a pending criminal case.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 22(1) gives everyone who is arrested the right to consult a lawyer of their choice. For those who cannot afford one, Article 39A directs the state to provide free legal aid so that poverty does not shut anyone out of justice, and the Supreme Court has read free legal aid for an accused into the fair-procedure requirement of Article 21. It is delivered through the Legal Services Authorities set up by statute.
Cites: Article 22, Article 39 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. The Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon (1979) held that a speedy trial is part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, and that keeping undertrials in jail for long periods without trial is unconstitutional. The right to bail is governed mainly by the criminal procedure statute, but Article 21 anchors the principle that liberty should not be denied through endless delay.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. A prisoner does not lose all Fundamental Rights at the jail gate. The Supreme Court has held that Article 21 continues to protect a prisoner's life, dignity, and freedom from torture or inhuman treatment, and that any deprivation must follow a fair procedure. Routine handcuffing, solitary confinement, and custodial violence have all been restrained by the Court under Article 21.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Not arbitrarily. In Olga Tellis (1985) the Supreme Court held that the right to livelihood is part of the right to life under Article 21, so pavement dwellers could not be evicted without a fair procedure and notice. The right to shelter has likewise been read into Article 21. The state can still evict for a valid public purpose, but only through due process, not overnight.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗
Largely yes. Article 19(1)(g) guarantees every citizen the right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade, or business. The state can impose reasonable restrictions under Article 19(6), such as requiring qualifications or a licence, and can even run a business itself to the exclusion of private players. Trades that are inherently harmful, like trafficking, get no protection at all.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Only within limits. Online speech is protected by Article 19(1)(a) just like offline speech. In Shreya Singhal (2015) the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, which had been used to arrest people for online posts, as vague and overbroad. You can still face action for speech that crosses into the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2), such as incitement to violence, defamation, or threats to public order.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Only within limits. Creative and artistic expression is part of the freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a). The state can restrict it only on the grounds listed in Article 19(2), and the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the test is a reasonable, strong-minded viewer, not the most sensitive one, and that the answer to speech one dislikes is more speech, not a ban. Films are certified under the Cinematograph Act rather than banned outright.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, enabled but conditional. Article 16(4A), added by the 77th Amendment in 1995, lets the state give reservation in promotions to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes not adequately represented in public services. The Supreme Court has held the state must first collect data showing backwardness and inadequate representation. It is a power the state may use, not an automatic right.
Cites: Article 16 Flag this answer ↗
Usually yes, until convicted. Articles 102 and 191 list the disqualifications for legislators, and the Representation of the People Act adds that a person convicted and sentenced to two years or more is disqualified. Someone only facing charges, not yet convicted, can still contest. The Supreme Court has pushed for faster trials and disclosure of criminal records, but has left an outright bar on the charged-but-not-convicted to Parliament.
Cites: Article 102, Article 191 Flag this answer ↗
Indirectly, not by the public. Article 54 says the President is elected by an electoral college made up of the elected members of both Houses of Parliament and the elected members of all the state legislative assemblies, including certain Union Territories. The votes are weighted and counted by a single transferable vote system of proportional representation. Citizens do not vote directly for the President.
Cites: Article 54 Flag this answer ↗
Article 110 defines a money bill as one dealing only with matters like taxation, government borrowing, or spending from the Consolidated Fund. A money bill can be introduced only in the Lok Sabha; the Rajya Sabha can suggest changes but cannot block it, and the Speaker's decision on whether a bill is a money bill is treated as final. The route has been controversial when used for laws that go beyond pure money matters.
Cites: Article 110 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. The word secular was added to the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment in 1976, and the Supreme Court has held secularism to be part of the basic structure. Indian secularism means the state has no religion of its own and treats all faiths equally, rather than strictly walling off religion from the state as some countries do. Articles 25 to 28 give it effect by protecting freedom of religion and barring state-run religious instruction.
Cites: Article 25, Preamble Flag this answer ↗
Article 28 says no religious instruction may be provided in schools wholly funded by the state. In schools that are only aided or recognised by the state, no student can be forced to take part in religious instruction or worship without their consent, or a guardian's consent for a minor. Institutions run by religious trusts have more latitude.
Cites: Article 28 Flag this answer ↗
Yes. Article 19(1)(c) guarantees every citizen the right to form associations, unions, or cooperative societies, which covers trade unions, clubs, political parties, and companies. The state can impose reasonable restrictions under Article 19(4) in the interests of public order, morality, or the sovereignty and integrity of India. This right does not, however, guarantee a right to strike.
Cites: Article 19 Flag this answer ↗
Only in a narrow way. Article 16 guarantees equal opportunity in public employment and bars discrimination on the ground of residence, with one exception: Article 16(3) lets Parliament, not a state on its own, prescribe a residence requirement for certain state jobs. Broad domicile-based reservation beyond what Article 16(3) allows, or forced into private jobs, has repeatedly been struck down by the courts.
Cites: Article 16 Flag this answer ↗
No tax can be levied or collected except by authority of law, which is the rule in Article 265. The Goods and Services Tax was introduced by the 101st Amendment in 2016, which added Article 246A giving both Parliament and the state legislatures the power to make GST laws, and Article 279A creating the GST Council to decide rates jointly. It replaced a web of separate central and state taxes with one shared system.
Cites: Article 246A, Article 265 Flag this answer ↗
It is the rule that Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot destroy its essential features. The Supreme Court laid it down in Kesavananda Bharati (1973): the amending power in Article 368 is wide but not unlimited, and features like democracy, secularism, judicial review, free elections, and the rule of law form a basic structure that no amendment can take away. It is judge-made, not written in the text.
Cites: Article 368 Flag this answer ↗
Yes, as part of privacy. In Puttaswamy (2017) a nine-judge bench held that the right to privacy, including informational privacy, is a Fundamental Right under Article 21. Any intrusion, such as surveillance or a search of your phone or data, must rest on a valid law, serve a legitimate aim, and be proportionate. The detailed rules on personal data now come from the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
Cites: Article 21 Flag this answer ↗