Rights Relating to Freedom :
Articles 19-22 guarantee certain fundamental freedoms.
The six freedoms of citizens
Article 19(1), of the Constitution, guarantees to the citizens of India six freedoms, namely:
(a) freedom of speech and expression;
(b) assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) form associations or unions
(d) move freely, throughout the territory of India;
(e) reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;
(f) practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.
These freedoms are those great and basic rights which are recognized as the natural rights inherent in the status of a citizen. At the same time, none of these freedoms is absolute but subject to reasonable restrictions specified under clauses (2) to (6) of the Article 19. The Constitution under Articles 19(2) to 19(6) permits the imposition of restrictions on these freedoms subject to the following conditions:
(a) The restriction can be imposed by law and not by a purely executive order issued under a statute;
(b) The restriction must be reasonable;
(c) The restriction must be imposed for achieving one or more of the objects specified in the respective clauses of Article 19.
Reasonableness
It is very important to note that the restrictions should be reasonable. If this word ‘reasonable’ is not there, the Government can impose any restrictions and they cannot be challenged. This word alone gives the right to an aggrieved person to challenge any restriction of the freedoms granted under this Article.
Reasonableness of the restriction is an ingredient common to all the clauses of Article 19. Reasonableness is an objective test to be applied by the judiciary. Legislative judgment may be taken into account by the Court, but it is not conclusive. It is subject to the supervision of Courts. The following factors are usually considered to assess the reasonableness of a law:
(i) The objective of the restriction;
(ii) The nature, extent and urgency of the evil sought to be dealt with by the law in question;
(iii) How far the restriction is proportion to the evil in question
(iv) Duration of the restriction
(v) The conditions prevailing at the time when the law was framed.
The onus of proving to the satisfaction of the Court that the restriction is reasonable is upon the State.
Procedural and Substantiveness
In determining the reasonableness of a law, the Court will not only see the surrounding circumstances, but all contemporaneous legislation passed as part of a single scheme. It is the reasonableness of the restriction and not of the law that has to be found out, and if the legislature imposes a restriction by one law but creates countervailing advantages by another law passed as part of the same legislative plan, the court can take judicial notice of such Acts forming part of the same legislative plan (Krishna Sagar Mills v. Union of India, AIR 1959 SC 316).
The phrase ‘reasonable restrictions’ connotes that the limitation imposed upon a person in the enjoyment of a right should not be arbitrary or of an excessive nature. In determining the reasonableness of a statute, the Court would see both the nature of the restriction and procedure prescribed by the statute for enforcing the restriction on the individual freedom. The reasonableness of a restriction has to be determined in an objective manner and from the point of view of the interests of the general public and not from the point of view of the persons upon whom the restrictions are imposed or upon abstract considerations. The Court is called upon to ascertain the reasonableness of the restrictions and not of the law which permits the restriction. The word ‘restriction’ also includes cases of prohibition and the State can establish that a law, though purporting to deprive a person of his fundamental right, under certain circumstances amounts to a reasonable restriction only. Though the test of reasonableness laid down in clauses (2) to (6) of Article 19 might in great part coincide with that for judging ‘due process’ under the American Constitution, it must not be assumed that these are identical. It has been held that the restrictions are imposed in carrying out the Directive Principles of State Policy is a point in favour of the reasonableness of the restrictions.