Professional Documents
Culture Documents
372 of 2017
JUDGMENT
opinions.
3
3) In substance, two questions were referred to this
questions referred.
under:-
4
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC and to secure to all
its citizens:
5
8) The keynote of the Preamble was to lay emphasis
fulfillment.
6
10) In my view, unity and integrity of the Nation
Nation.
democracy.
7
liberty and nor can liberty and equality be divorced
of law (see-S.S. Bola & Ors. vs. B.D. Sardana & Ors.
8
incorporated in different Articles of Part III of the
basis.
9
rights falling in Part III though not defined in the
reads as under: -
10
vs. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27 up to Mohd Arif
11
evolution, the law laid down in some earlier cases was
12
be clarified, or when the language admits of meaning
Court alone and one may not require taking the help of
13
especially in its formative years has taken the help of
14
Ltd. vs. Raghunath Prasad Jhunjhunwala & Anr.
15
gender, race, religion, caste and creed. It is, of course,
by law.
to-case basis.
basis.
16
29) In my considered view, the answer to the
17
light of Indian and American case law and various
international conventions.
Para 28 as under:
18
intrusion can be a reasonable restriction only
if it has reasonable basis or reasonable
materials to support it.
from Article 19(1)(a) and (d) and Article 21, yet it is not
development.
19
expressions of the Preamble namely, "liberty of
in juxtaposition.
20
which the State is entitled to impose on the basis of
law.
21
38) I entirely agree with their reasoning and the
scholarly opinions.
in their submissions.
22
settled principle of law that the reference Court cannot
with law.
23
submissions, variety of case law and the literature on
views.
..................................J.
[ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]
New Delhi,
August 24, 2017.
24