Indian Constitution Article 17: Untouchability Abolished

Article 17 of the Indian Constitution: Abolition of Untouchability

• Article 17, a part of the Right to Equality (Articles 14-18), abolishes untouchability in all forms.
• The practice of untouchability is prohibited and declared a punishable offense.

Text of Article 17

• "Untouchability" is abolished, and its practice in any form is forbidden.
• Enforcing any disability arising from "untouchability" is a punishable offense, as per the law.
• This provision prevents discrimination based on untouchability.

Key Features of Article 17

• Complete ban on the practice of untouchability in any form.
• Enforcing untouchability is treated as a criminal offense.
• Applies to private individuals, government institutions, and religious organizations.
• Extends to public places, employment, education, temples, water sources, and other social services.

What is "Untouchability"?

• The Constitution does not define untouchability but refers to social discrimination based on caste, particularly against Dalits (Scheduled Castes).
• Includes denial of entry to temples, schools, or public places.
• Includes prohibition from using public wells, roads, or transport.
• Includes social boycotts or restrictions on inter-caste dining and marriage.
• Does not apply to personal untouchability, like avoiding someone due to personal dislike or hygiene concerns.

Laws to Enforce Article 17

• Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 declares any act of untouchability a punishable offense.
• It prohibits refusal of access to public places, temples, wells, shops, and other facilities.
• Punishments for practicing untouchability include imprisonment up to 6 months or a fine up to ₹500.
• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 provides stricter punishments for offenses against Dalits and Adivasis.
• Recognizes violence, social boycotts, and economic exploitation as criminal acts.

Important Supreme Court Cases on Article 17

• State of Karnataka v. Appa Balu Ingale (1993): The Supreme Court ruled that untouchability is abolished in all forms, including social boycotts and caste-based discrimination.
• Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (2018) – Sabarimala Case: Barring women from temples due to religious beliefs is unconstitutional under Articles 14, 15, and 17.

Conclusion of Article 17

• Article 17 protects the dignity of Dalits and marginalized communities, reinforcing India's commitment to equality and human rights.
• Social discrimination still exists, requiring stronger implementation and awareness.

Article 18 of the Indian Constitution: Abolition of Titles

• Article 18 focuses on the abolition of titles to ensure an egalitarian society, preventing distinctions among citizens.

Text of Article 18

• Clause (1): The government cannot grant titles like "Raja," "Maharaja," or "Sir," but military and academic titles are allowed.
• Clause (2): Indian citizens cannot accept honorary titles from foreign governments.
• Clause (3): Foreign nationals serving the Indian government cannot accept titles from foreign countries without the President’s approval.
• Clause (4): Government officials cannot accept gifts, payments, or offices from foreign nations without the President’s consent.

Key Features of Article 18

• Article 18 prevents the creation of an aristocratic class in India.
• Allows military and academic distinctions (e.g., "Field Marshal" or "Doctor").
• Bans foreign titles for Indian citizens to maintain national integrity.
• Requires President’s approval for government officials to accept any foreign honors or benefits.

Why Was Article 18 Introduced?

• Before independence, the British awarded titles like ‘Sir’ and ‘Rai Bahadur’ to Indians who supported their rule.
• The Indian Constitution abolished such practices to promote equality and democracy.

Impact of Article 18

• In 1971, the 26th Constitutional Amendment abolished the privy purses and official recognition of royal titles.
• No government can grant civilian titles like ‘Sir’ and ‘Rai Bahadur’ to Indian citizens.
• The Supreme Court ruled (1996, Balaji Raghavan Case) that Padma Awards (Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, etc.) are not ‘titles’ under Article 18 because they are awards, not hereditary titles.
• Recipients cannot use Padma Awards as a prefix or suffix.

Important Supreme Court Judgments

• Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996): Upheld Padma Awards as constitutional because they are only honors, not titles.
• Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): Declared that granting political titles violates the democratic and egalitarian spirit of the Constitution.

Conclusion of Article 18

• Article 18 ensures social equality by preventing the creation of privileged classes.
• It upholds India's democratic and republican ideals, ensuring that no citizen enjoys special status based on titles, except for military and academic achievements.