Article 36 of the Indian Constitution: Defining "State" for the Purposes of Fundamental Rights

Introduction

Article 36 of the Indian Constitution provides an expansive definition of the term "State" for the purposes of fundamental rights. It extends the applicability of fundamental rights beyond the actions of the government and includes private individuals or entities performing public functions. In the current modern era, where the protection of fundamental rights is crucial, it is important to discuss the scope, implications, and relevant case laws associated with Article 36.

Understanding Article 36

Article 36 of the Indian Constitution defines the term "State" for the purposes of Part III (Fundamental Rights). It includes not only the government and its instrumentalities but also private individuals or entities performing public functions. This broad definition ensures that fundamental rights are protected not only from governmental actions but also from private entities exercising public power.

Relevant Case Laws Shaping the Interpretation of Article 36

1. R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (1979):

In this case, the Supreme Court held that instrumentalities of the State, including government-owned corporations or entities substantially funded or controlled by the government, are covered under the definition of "State" in Article 36. The court emphasized that the actions of such entities must be in conformity with fundamental rights.

2. Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981):

The Ajay Hasia case expanded the scope of Article 36 to include private individuals or entities performing public functions. The Supreme Court held that any private entity exercising power, authority, or functions of a public nature must be treated as "State" under Article 36, thereby subject to the obligations and limitations imposed by fundamental rights.

3. Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002):

In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that Article 36 applies to private entities only when they perform public functions or discharge public duties. The court held that when a private entity is substantially funded by the government, it would be subject to the same constitutional limitations as the government.

Relevance of Article 36 in the Modern Era

1. Protecting Fundamental Rights from Privatization:

In the current modern era, there has been an increase in the involvement of private entities in performing functions that were traditionally the domain of the government. Article 36 assumes importance in ensuring that fundamental rights are not circumvented or violated due to privatization. It extends the reach of fundamental rights to these private entities, ensuring accountability and protecting individuals from arbitrary actions.

2. Safeguarding Individual Liberties:

Article 36 acts as a safeguard to protect individual liberties from both the state and non-state actors exercising public functions. It recognizes that power and authority exercised by private entities can impact the enjoyment of fundamental rights. By bringing such entities within the purview of fundamental rights, Article 36 promotes equality, dignity, and justice for all individuals.

3. Balancing Private Interests and Public Good:

In the modern era, where public-private partnerships and collaborations are common, Article 36 ensures that private entities engaged in public functions are not immune to constitutional scrutiny. It strikes a balance between private interests and the public good by subjecting private entities to the constitutional principles enshrined in fundamental rights, thereby preventing the abuse of power and protecting the interests of the public.

Conclusion

Article 36 of the Indian Constitution provides a broad and inclusive definition of the term "State" for the purposes of fundamental rights. It extends the application of fundamental rights to private entities performing public functions, ensuring that individuals are protected from both state and non-state actors. The case laws discussed above have played a significant role in shaping the interpretation of Article 36 and expanding its scope to cover private entities exercising public power. In the current modern era, where the line between state and non-state actors is often blurred, Article 36 assumes greater significance in safeguarding fundamental rights, promoting accountability, and upholding the principles of justice and equality for all individuals.