Constitution of India · Section Article 13
Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights
Article 13 — Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights
- Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights.—(1) All laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement of this Constitution, in so far as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Part, shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, be void. (2) The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void. (3) In this article, unless the context otherwise requires,—
- (a) “law” includes any Ordinance, order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification, custom or usage having in the territory of India the force of law;
- (b) “laws in force” includes laws passed or made by a Legislature or other competent authority in the territory of India before the commencement of this Constitution and not previously repealed, notwithstanding that any such law or any part thereof may not be then in operation either at all or in particular areas. (4) Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment of this Constitution made under article 368.] Right to Equality
Plain English Summary
This article ensures that no law currently in place that goes against the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution is valid. It also prevents the government from making new laws that take away or reduce these fundamental rights. Essentially, it protects your basic rights against unfair laws.
Key Points
- Laws that conflict with Fundamental Rights are void (invalid).
- The State cannot make any law that destroys or reduces the rights guaranteed in this Part of the Constitution.
- This rule applies to all types of laws, including ordinances, rules, and regulations.
- This protection does not apply to amendments made under Article 368.
Why It Matters
This article is crucial because it acts as a shield, ensuring that citizens' fundamental rights remain protected against arbitrary or oppressive legislation by the government.
Landmark Judgements
| Case | Year | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| State of West Bengal vs. Prabhat Kumar | 1950 | Established the principle that laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights are void. |
| Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala | 1973 | While dealing with the Basic Structure, it reinforced the supremacy of fundamental rights over ordinary laws. |