Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability

Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability
In our Indian society, the practice of untouchability is an old one, but so is the struggle
against it.
Before independence, i.e. even before the British ruled, our country did witness a lot of social
movement against this practice of untouchability. In this post, we are going to look at what is
article 17 of the Indian constitution, and what is the matter it deals.
Article 17 deals with a very ancient and discriminatory practice of the Indian society,
untouchability. During the British era Mahatma Gandhi, Jyotibha Phule and BR Ambedkar
were the leading figures against the practice of untouchability. Mahatma Gandhi even went
forward and said that “untouchability is a sin of Hinduism”.
What is Untouchability?
The main keyword of the entire article 17 is the word untouchability. But a fascinating fact is,
it is not defined in the constitution either in any law passed by the Parliament.
So it means the constitution has given us the word untouchability but did not define it. And
whenever there is a need to identify or interpret anything about the constitution, the judiciary
of India is liable to do it.
In Jai Singh vs. Union of India case Rajasthan High Court and Devrajiah vs B. Padmana
case of Madras High Court defined the word untouchability.
The court said that in article 17, the word ‘Untouchability’ is placed under inverted commas,
which means the word is not to be taken by its literal or grammatical interpretation. The
meaning of the word is to be derived from historical development and historical practices.
Untouchability refers to the social disability imposed on certain classes of a person because
of their birth in a specific backward class. Hence, it does not cover any social boycott of a
few individuals or their exclusion from religious services, etc.
Therefore the word untouchability in article 17 only means ‘Caste-based untouchability’.

How article 17 works?
Till now, we know that article 17 abolishes the practice of untouchability in India in any
form. But the question arises of how it works.
To deals with the problem of untouchability, article 17 says explicitly that it is forbidden and
even after prohibiting if anybody practices it then that person is punishable as per the law. As
of now, we know how this practice has been forbidden, now let’s get to the Punishment part.
To know how a person is punished when he practices untouchability, we first have to

understand article 35 of the Indian constitution.
Whenever there is a provision of the offence or prescribing of a punishment defined in

fundamental rights of the constitution, i.e. from article 12 to 35, that power has been given
under section 35 of the constitution.
Since we know article 17 also prescribe punishment for untouchability, it means that
punishment can be given through section 35.
So, Article 17 – Anyone who practices untouchability shall be punished.
Article 35 – In entire fundament rights if any punishment is prescribed, then it can be given
through section 35.
The Untouchability Offences Act of 1955
To fulfil the mandate provided by article 17 and 35, the Parliament passed The
Untouchability Offences Act 1955, which includes punishment for untouchability.
But later the government realised that all the provisions and punishment defined under this
Act were inadequate.
Therefore in the year 1965, a committee was set up to revise this Act. This committee was
known as ‘Committee on Untouchability – Economic and Educational Development of
Scheduled Caste’. This committee came up with multiple recommendations.
In the year 1976, all the recommendations were included, and the previous Act of 1955 was
incorporated as ‘The Civil Rights Protection Act 1955’.
Important cases related to Article 17

In People Union for Democratic Rights vs. Union of India case, the court said that the
protection provided under article 15 and article 17 is available against state and private
individual. It means all the citizens are protected against the practice of untouchability from
both state and private individuals. So the implications of both the articles are broader than the
other articles.
In State of Karnataka vs Appa Balu Ingale case, the supreme court said that the objective of
the article 17 is to remove all forms of disability, restrictions and disability on the sole basis
of caste and religion.
Apart from the Civil Rights Protection act, there is one more law that describes the
punishment for the untouchability, i.e. ‘ST-SC Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989. This Act
also provides other crucial information such as how the trial has to be conducted, what is the
relief’s available, the formation of special courts, etc.

Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 17 of Indian Constitution & Untouchability

Therefore the word untouchability in article 17 only means ‘Caste-based untouchability’.

To know how a person is punished when he practices untouchability, we first have to

Whenever there is a provision of the offence or prescribing of a punishment defined in

So, Article 17 – Anyone who practices untouchability shall be punished.

The Untouchability Offences Act of 1955

Important cases related to Article 17

You might also like