Vote people, Vote!
And share!
What are the authentic sources for constitutional amendment question (1st vs 42nd amendment) and the due process of law?
THE CONSTITUTION (FIRST AMENDMENT) ACT, 1951
Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Constitution (First Amendment) Bill, 1951 which was enacted as the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951
STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
During the last fifteen months of the working of the Constitution, certain difficulties have been brought to light by judicial decisions and pronouncements specially in regard to the chapter on fundamental rights. The citizen's right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by article 19(1)(a) has been held by some courts to be so comprehensive as not to render a person culpable even if he advocates murder and other crimes of violence. In other countries with written constitutions, freedom of speech and of the press is not regarded as debarring the State from punishing or preventing abuse of this freedom. The citizen's right to practise any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business conferred by article 19(1)(g) is subject to reasonable restrictions which the laws of the State may impose "in the interests of general public". While the words cited are comprehensive enough to cover any scheme of nationalisation which the State may undertake, it is desirable to place the matter beyond doubt by a clarificatory addition to article 19(6). Another article in regard to which unanticipated difficulties have arisen is article 31. The validity of agrarian reform measures passed by the State Legislatures in the last three years has, in spite of the provisions of clauses (4) and (6) of article 31, formed the subject-matter of dilatory litigation, as a result of which the implementation of these important measures, affecting large numbers of people, has been held up.
all we can do is pray
I read abut Natural justice which is more accomodative and comprehensive
@DrKingSchultz100 Bhai, it should be A. Also, as per classnotes of Vajiram, SC in Maneka Gandhi case held that, it will apply the Principle of Natural Justice and if law is arbitrary and oppressive, it will declare the law as invalid. It said that Article 21 inherently includes the principle of natural justice and thus it succeeded in reading due process of law under Article 21.
ANSWERED it on the same logic of MENAKA GANDHI
Fair applications sound too limiting
@Sangaideer squirrel, prison, migration pact imo....but who knows......
what should be the answer for GCM? A?