ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my teacher of Constitutional Law

Dr. Prabhat Saha who gave me golden opportunity to write this wonderful project on the
topic of “Fundamental Duties of Indian Constitution : A Critique”, which also helped me in
doing a lot of research and I came to know about many new things, I am really thankful to
him.
Secondly , I would also like to thank my friends who helped me a lot in finalising this project
within the limited time frame.
The success and final outcome of this project required a lot of guidance and assistance from
many people and I am extremely privileged to have got this all along the completion of my
project. All that I have done is only due to such supervision and assistance and I would not
forget to thank them.

-Raushan Kumar
 Introduction

The Constitution of India, the longest written Constitution of the world, has
envisaged a holistic approach towards civic life in a democratic polity. Certain
rights have been guaranteed within the Constitution as Fundamental Rights. Since
human conduct cannot be confined to the realm of Fundamental Rights, the
Constitution has envisaged certain duties, which are correlated to the rights, and
those duties have been described as Fundamental Duties. The Fundamental
Duties of citizens were added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment in
1976, upon the recommendations of the Swaran Singh Committee that was
constituted by the government earlier that year. Originally ten in number, the
Fundamental Duties were increased to eleven by the 86th Amendment in 2002,
which added a duty on every parent or guardian to ensure that their child or ward
was provided opportunities for education between the ages of six and fourteen
years. The other Fundamental Duties obligate all citizens to respect the national
symbols of India, including the Constitution, to cherish its heritage, preserve its
composite culture and assist in its defence. They also obligate all Indians to
promote the spirit of common brotherhood, protect the environment and public
property, develop Scientific temper abjure violence, and strive towards
excellence in all spheres of life. Citizens are morally obligated by the Constitution
to perform these duties. However, like the Directive Principles, these are non-
justifiable, without any legal sanction in case of their violation or non-
compliance. There is reference to such duties in international instruments such as
the Universal declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, and Article 51A brings the Indian Constitution into
conformity with these treaties. It is true that there is no legal sanction provided
for violation or non-performance of Fundamental Duties. There is neither specific
provision for enforceability nor any specific prohibition. However, Fundamental
Duties have an inherent element of compulsion regarding compliance. Out of the
ten clauses in article 51A, five are positive duties and the other five are negative
duties. Clauses (b), (d), (f), (h) and (j) require the citizens to perform these
Fundamental Duties actively. It is said that by their nature, it is not practicable to
enforce the Fundamental Duties and they must be left to the will and aspiration
of the citizens. However, in the case of citizens holding public office, each and
all Fundamental Duties can be enforced by suitable legislation and departmental
rules of conduct.
Fundamental Duties

Fundamental Duties are the modernization of the constitution. Fundamental

duties have been incorporated in the Indian Constitution to remind every citizen
that they should not only be conscious of their rights, but also of their duties. We
have borrowed these duties from the constitution of USSR. Under Indian
constitution, the Constitution (42nd) Amendment Act,1976 inserted a new part
IV A consisting of Article 51A has been added to the constitution. Article 51 A
lays down the following ten Fundamental Duties. It shall be the duty of every
citizen of India-
a) To abide by the constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National
Flag and the National Anthem;

b) To cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for
freedom

c) To uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;

d) To defend the country and render national services, when called upon to do so;

e) To promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the
people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional
diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women;

f) To value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;

g) To protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers
and wild life, and to have compassion for living creatures ;

h) To develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and
reform;

i) To safeguard public property and to abjure violence;

j) To strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity

so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavor and achievement

k) Who is a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child

or as the case may be, ward between the age of sex to fourteen years.
Rationale of Fundamental Duties

The various clauses of Article 51 A express fine sentiments. Some of the above
duties are already being enforced through ordinary law for example there are laws
making any activity disrupting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of India
illegal and penal. But some of the other duties mentioned above appear to be
legally unenforceable for they are vague and imprecise. These can at best be
regarded as directory. As regards enforceability of these duties, it has been held
that these duties being duties of individual citizens cannot been forced through
mandamus as they cast no public duties. The duties can be promoted by
constitutional means. Even though, the significance of the Article 51 A lies in the
fact that these clauses can be taken in to consideration in relation to interpretation
of statutes and Acts of the parliament or state legislature, especially an ambiguous
statutes. It has been aptly observed that: “Fundamental duties though not
enforceable by a writ of the court, yet provide valuable guide and aid to
interpretation of constitutional and legal issues. In case of doubt or choice of
people’s wish as manifested through Article 51 A can serve as a guide not only
for resolving the issues but also for constructing or moulding the relief to the
given by the Courts. Constitutional enactment of fundamental duties if it has to
have any meaning must be used by courts as a tool to tap, even a taboo, on state
action drifting away from constitutional values, the judges declared.”1 The
present research is going to stress on the aspect of importance of the research
theme in the governance of the country, by focusing on the responsibilities given
to the citizens as well as state to follow and implement these respectively. Here,
the present Article if it has to have any meaning also needed to be seen applied
by the judiciary as and when occasion demands for the purpose of interpretation
of the constitutional and legal issues. Though Article 51A does not cast any
fundamental duty on the state, the fact remains that the duty of every citizen is
the collective duty of the State.

Duties which can be incorporated under Article 51-A

 Duty to vote
 Duty to pay taxes
 Duty to help accident victims
 Duty to keep the premise clean
 Duty to prevent civil wrongs
 Duty to raise against injustice
 Duty to protect whistleblowers
 Duty to support bonafide civil society movements

1
AIIMS Students Union v. AIIMS ,AIR 2001 SC 3262
Enforceability of Fundamental Duties

The fundamental duties enjoined on citizen under Article 51-A should also guide
the legislative and executive actions of elected or non-elected institutions and
organisations of the citizens including the municipal bodies.
The legal utility of fundamental duties is similar to that of the directives; while
the Directives are addressed to the state, so are the duties addressed to the citizens,
without any legal sanction for their violation. The citizen, it is expected, should
be his own monitor while exercising and enforcing his Fundamental rights. He
should keep in mind that he owes the duties specified in Article 51-A to the State
and if he does not care for the duties, he does not deserve the rights. Of course,
the duties as such are not legally enforceable in the Courts of law, but if a law has
been made to prohibit any act or conduct in violation of the duties, it would be
reasonable restriction on the relevant Fundamental Rights.
However, the fundamental Duties are not enforceable by mandamus or any other
legal remedy
Directions to State/Central Government.—Since the Fundamental Duties are not
addressed to the State, a citizen cannot claim that he must be properly equipped
by the state so that he may perform his duties under Article 51-A. However, the
Supreme Court has issued directions to the States, having regard to Article 51-A
(g).
Protection of environmental—Duty of.—In view of the duty to protect and
improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wild-life and
to have compassion for living creatures imposed on the citizens under Article 51-
A (g) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has held that it is a duty of the
Central Government to take a number of steps in order to make this provision
effective, and issued the following directions to the Central Government—

a) To direct all educational institutions throughout India to give weekly

lessons in the first ten classes, relating to the protection and improvement of the
natural environment including forest, lake, rivers and wild life.
b) To get text books written for the said purpose and to distribute them free of
cost.
c) To introduce short term courses for training of teachers who teach this subject.
d) Not only the Central Government but also the State Government and local
authorities are to introduce cleanliness weeks when all citizens including member
of Executive, the Legislature and the judiciary should render free personal service
to keep their local areas free from pollution of land, water and air.
In Aruna Roy v. UOI,2 the validity of national curriculum framework for school
education was challenged on the ground that it was violative of the Art 28 of the
constitution and anti secular. It provides imparting of value development
education related to basic of all religions. The court held that the NCFSE does
not mention of imparting “ religious instructions” as prohibited under art 28.
What is sought to be imparted is incorporated in article 51 (A)(e) which provides
“to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the
people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional
diversities; to renounces practices derogatory to the dignity of woman”. And to
see that universal values such as truth related to conduct, peace, love and non-
violence be the foundation of education. Accordingly, the court held that such
education is neither violative of at. 28 of the Constitution nor is against the
concept of secularism.

Non-Enforceability of Fundamental Duties :

Unlike Art. 37 of the Constitution which makes the Directive Principles of State
Policy non-enforceable, and, therefore, non-justiciable. There is no specific
provision in the Constitution making the Fundamental Duties non-enforceable,
and therefore, non-justiciable . However, the fact remains that they are non
justiciable. There is no specific provision in the Constitution as to the sanctions
to be applied for the enforcement of these duties and, therefore, their breach
cannot be visited with punishment unless there exists on the Statute book a
specific penal provision on the subject. Article 20(1) of the Constitution
postulates that before a person can be convicted of an offence, there must exist a
law and that law must be violated. But there is no law providing for punishment
for non-observance of Fundamental duty come from some well meaning people
that the insertion of ten point duties in the Constitution is only an expression of a
pious wish like the ten Commandments without any authority to enforce them.
Critics argue that in the absence of provision for the enforcement of Fundamental
Duties, their inclusion is only an adornment or an expression of a pious wish like
the Ten Commandments. It is also argued that in a society like India where for
want of legal and Constitutional morality, even enforceable laws are being
violated by vested interests without any qualms of conscience, to expect that non-
enforceable laws will be respectfully observed, is nothing more than a pipe
dream. Bhagwati J. has observed that if Fundamental Rights are not enforced,
these would prove to be a paper parchment or a teasing illusion. As observed by

2
Aruna Roy v. UOI ,2002 SC 3176
him: "....it is only the availability of judicial remedy for enforcement which
invests law with meaning and purpose or else the law would remain merely a
paper parchment, a teasing illusion and a promise of unreality".3 By the same
token, non-enforceable Fundamental Duties can also prove to be nothing more
than a paper parchment or a teasing illusion. Therefore, it becomes necessary to
provide teeth to these duties by making their breach punishable under the law.
Another reason for making the duties enforceable is that these duties are very
important, being fundamental in the governance of the country. Since the
"Fundamental Duties" are the duties essentially to be performed for facilitating
proper governance of a democratic society, they cannot be incorporated into the
Constitution as a mere suggestion bereft of legal sanction and their observance
left at the sweet will of the citizens. It is indeed disheartening to note that inspite
of these duties being called "Fundamental", half of the country's population is not
even aware of their incorporation, much less their importance in the scheme of
the Constitution.

Criticism

Some of the fundamental duties enshrined in article 51A have been incorporated
in separate laws. For instance, the first duty includes respect for the National Flag
and the National Anthem. Disrespect is punishable by law. To value and preserve
the rich heritage of the mosaic that is India should help to weld our people into
one nation but much more than article 51A will be needed to treat all human
beings equally, to respect each religion and to confine it to the private sphere and
not make it a bone of contention between different communities of this land. In
sum, the Commission believes that article 51A has travelled a great distance since
it was introduced in the 42nd Amendment and further consideration should be
given to ways and means to popularise the knowledge and content of the
Fundamental Duties and effectuate them.
The most important task before us is to reconcile the claims of the individual
citizen and those of the civic society. To achieve this, it is important to orient the
individual citizen to be conscious of his social and citizenship responsibilities and
so shape the society that we all become solicitous and considerate of the
inalienable rights of our fellow citizens. Therefore, awareness of our citizenship
duties is as important as awareness of our rights.
Every right implies a corresponding duty but every duty does not imply a
corresponding right. The fundamental duties are the foundations of human dignity
and national character. If every citizen performs his duties irrespective of
3
Bhagwati J. (as he then was ) ; S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1982 SC 149(189)
considerations of caste, creed, colour and language, most of the malaise of the
present day polity could be contained, if not eradicated, and the society as a whole
uplifted. Rich or poor, in power or out of power, obedience to citizenship duty, at
all costs and risks, is the essence of civilized life.
Some further thought needs to be given to clauses (e) and (f) of article 51A.
Article 51A(e) desires the promotion of harmony and the spirit of common
brotherhood among all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and
regional or sectional diversities and renunciation of practices derogatory to the
dignity of women. It is couched in broad terms but it should be clear that attacks
on minority communities or minority opinions are frowned upon. Respect for
both are essential and the wording lends support to a broad humanism to cover
such differences as may exist or better still, co-exist. Two thoughts can be
distilled. The first is that the objective will not be reached unless there is a
determined effort to restrict religious practices to the home on the justified
premise that one’s religion is a personal matter and is not conducive to mass
assertiveness. The other is the status of women. Lip service is being paid to the
doctrine of gender equality. The fact remains that generally women are still
regarded as inferior both home and workplace although the Commission has
noticed an improvement, however dissatisfied it may be with the degree of the at
improvement. It is necessary to separate religious precepts from civil law. Civil
law as the name implies is a matter for society not for religious leaders and it
would seem to us to be axiomatic that in matters of civil rights, laws of property
and inheritance and marriage and divorce, although practices may differ, legal
rights that accrue must be the same. The time to begin training our young people
to respect the National flag and sing the National anthem, to respect women, to
hold all religions equal and deserving of as much respect as one’s
own, to accept that all human beings are born equal and are entitled to equal
treatment are among principles best taught by examples when the child is too
young to understand but not too young to obey. The focus must, therefore, shift
to education which has suffered from serious neglect.
Clause (f) of article 51A requires us to value and preserve the rich heritage of our
composite culture. It follows that we may not break each other’s places of
worship, set fire to religious texts, or beat upon another’s priests or obstruct those
who exercise their Fundamental Right under article 25 to profess, practice and
propagate religion. Composite culture means culture drawn from many strands.
Here again education in its broadest and best sense can provide the corrective to
the aberrations that have occurred .Education is not confined only to the time
spent in schools and colleges. Education begins at birth in the subconscious and
continues till death. Anyone who says that he has nothing more to learn is already
brain-dead.

It follows that the influences that play on a child at home are of great importance.
Parents should understand that education begins at home, the examples they set,
the environment of enlightenment and tolerance that is necessary to produce good
citizens cannot be sub-contracted to formal schooling important though this is.
Schemes should, therefore, be framed that include parents in social activities
that have as their objective the country’s age
-old traditions, its welcome to the persecuted of every faith, its virtues of tolerance
of and respect for all religions and a certain pride in belonging to this land and in
being considered as Indian. The highest office in our democracy is the office of
citizen; this is not only a platitude, it must translate into reality.

Conclusion

In modern context, it has become increasingly important to instil a reinvigorated

sense of civic responsibility among Indian citizens. This can be achieved by
adding new duties to the existing list of Fundamental Duties while also laying
emphasis on the performance of the existing ones. Excessive emphasis on
exercise of Fundamental Rights by citizens diminishes the importance of
performance of their correlated duties. The continued expansion of Fundamental
Rights of citizens needs to be met with additional responsibilities imposed on
them for an improved quality of Indian society.
There is a perception that since Fundamental Duties are not enforceable in courts
of law, they don’t hold significance. Merely because a rule is not backed by
sanctions on disobedience, does not mean it has no importance. It is still regarded
a rule of law that is expected to be followed.
Although in the context of Directive Principles (which are essentially duties owed
by the state towards its citizens), the Supreme Court in Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors.
v. Union of India, the Supreme Court recognised this proposition - “There may
be a rule which imposes an obligation on an individual or authority and yet it may
not be enforceable in a court of law and therefore not give rise to a corresponding
enforceable right in another person. But it would still be a legal rule because it
prescribes a norm of conduct to be followed by such individual or
authority. The law may provide a mechanism for enforcement of this obligation,
but the existence of the obligation does not depend upon the creation of such
mechanism. The obligation exists prior to and independent of the mechanism of
enforcement. A rule imposing an obligation or duty would not therefore cease to
be a rule of law because there is no regular judicial or quasi-judicial machinery
to enforce its command. Such a rule would exist despite of any problem relating
to its enforcement. Otherwise the conventions of the Constitution and even rules
of International law would no longer be liable to be regarded as rules of law”.
Hence, Fundamental Duties too are like any rules of law that must be observed
by all. Their significance is not diminished by the fact that there is no punishment
prescribed for not following them. Fundamental Duties should be treated as
constitutional values that must be propagated by all citizens.
The idea behind implementing Fundamental Duties of citizens was to serve a
useful purpose. In particular, it is impossible for a democratic polity to ever
succeed where the citizens are not willing to be active participants in the process
of governance by assuming responsibilities and discharging citizenship duties.
Therefore, the most important task before us is to reconcile the claims of the
individual citizen and those of the civic society. To achieve this, it is required to
orient the citizen to be conscious of his social and citizenship responsibilities and
the society should be shaped in such a way that we all show our utmost respect
to the inalienable rights of our fellow citizens. Awareness of our citizenship duties
is as important as awareness of our rights. Thus, the Fundamental Duties act as
the foundation of human dignity and national character. Those duties actually
constitute the conscience of our Constitution.
 Index
S.No Topic Page
No.
Bibliography
List of Cases