Supreme Court: What is doctrine of proportionality as per Indian constitutional law?

 In the case of Modern Dental College and Research Centre and Ors. (supra), this Court observed thus:

60. .......Thus, while examining as to whether the impugned provisions of the statute and Rules amount to reasonable restrictions and are brought out in the interest of the general public, the exercise that is required to be undertaken is the balancing of fundamental right to carry on occupation on the one hand and the restrictions imposed on the other hand. This is what is known as "doctrine of proportionality". Jurisprudentially, "proportionality" can be defined as the set of Rules determining the necessary and sufficient conditions for limitation of a constitutionally protected right by a law to be constitutionally permissible. According to Aharon Barak (former Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Israel), there are four sub-components of proportionality which need to be satisfied [Aharon Barak, Proportionality: Constitutional Rights and Their Limitation (Cambridge University Press 2012).], a limitation of a constitutional right will be constitutionally permissible if:

(i) it is designated for a proper purpose;

(ii) the measures undertaken to effectuate such a limitation are rationally connected to the fulfilment of that purpose;

(iii) the measures undertaken are necessary in that there are no alternative measures that may similarly achieve that same purpose with a lesser degree of limitation; and finally

(iv) there needs to be a proper relation ("proportionality stricto sensu" or "balancing") between the importance of achieving the proper purpose and the social importance of preventing the limitation on the constitutional right. {Para 85}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 295 of 2022,

Decided On: 13.11.2024

In Re: Directions in the matter of demolition of structures

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.

Author: B.R. Gavai, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/1211/2024.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Whether freedom of access to information can violate existing law?

There can be no doubt that there has to be freedom
of access to information but, a significant one, such freedom
cannot violate a law that holds the field. Be it noted, this
Court has shown its concern with regard to the decrease of
sex ratio in three decisions, namely, Centre for Enquiry into
Health & Allied Themes (CEHAT) and others vs. Union of India
and others (2001) 5 SCC 577, Centre for Enquiry into Health
& Allied Themes (CEHAT) and others vs. Union of India and
others (2003) 8 SCC 398, Voluntary Health Association of
Punjab vs. Union of India and others (2013) 4 SCC 1, and
recently in Voluntary Health Association of Punjab vs. Union
of India and others 2016 (10) SCALE 531. The concern of the
legislative response in the 1994 Act has been further
articulated by this Court in last two decades. In such a
situation, whether the companies can take shelter of free
access or choose to be catalysts in the depletion of sex
ratio, has to be debated.
 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F  I N D I A

Writ Petition (Civil) No.341/2008
SABU MATHEW GEORGE 
 V
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 

CORAM :
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY
Dated:16th February, 2017.
Citation:(2017) 2 SCC 514

Print Page