Doctrine of Proportionality

 The Doctrine of Proportionality is frequently invoked as a basis for judicial review in matters involving administrative action.

Doctrine of Proportionality - Background

The theory arose in Europe and basically states that the penalty should not be disproportionate to the crime committed and that the tools chosen by the administration to attain a certain goal or outcome should not be more restrictive than what is necessary to achieve it.

In the case of Om Kumar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India adopted the proportionality concept and noted that Indian courts have been using this approach in circumstances of legislation that violates fundamental rights entrenched in Article 19(1) of the constitution since 1950.


Doctrine of Proportionality - Concept

When taking administrative action, the body should bear in mind the goal it is pursuing and the methods it is employing to get there; if its actions depart from the goal, are discriminatory, or disproportionate, the court will overturn them under the doctrine of proportionality.

The principle of proportionality evaluates two aspects of a decision:

  • Whether the relative merits of different objectives or interests were appropriately weighted or fairly balanced
  • Whether the measure in question was in the circumstances excessively restrictive or inflicted an unnecessary burden on affected persons.
Om Kumar v. Union of India (2000)

Om Kumar v. Union of India (2000)

  • It established the Doctrine of Proportionality in India.
  • Surprisingly, the Supreme Court, in this case, discovered that Indian courts had routinely applied the doctrine of proportionality in determining the validity of legislative actions in relation to laws infringing on the fundamental freedoms enumerated in Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution since 1950.
  • The Supreme Court determined that administrative actions impacting fundamental freedoms (Article 19 and Article 21) in India have always been judged on the criteria of proportionality, even when it is not explicitly stated that the proportionality principle is used.
  • As a result, the Court declared clearly that the idea of proportionality applies to the Judicial Review of administrative actions that are in violation of Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Other Cases

Doctrine of Proportionality - Other Cases

  • The law regarding proportionality in India remains at what has been stated in Omkumar's case.
  • The only advancement could be the vague observation in a few subsequent Judgments that the doctrine of unreasonableness is giving way to the doctrine of proportionality such as U.P. State Road Transport vs Subhash Chandra Sharma, Coimbatore District Central Cooperative Bank v. Employees Association, Dev Singh v. Punjab Tourism Development Corporation, etc.
  • The Supreme Court affirmed the proportionality test in K. S. Puttaswamy Vs. Union of India.
  • It was decided that while determining the proportionality of legislation, the constraints imposed by the state on citizens' basic rights must be considered.
  • When considering the proportionality of measures, it is important to consider not only the legal and physical constraints but also the terror that these restrictions instill in the minds of the general public.
  • The legitimacy of the internet shutdown and mobility restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir was recently challenged in the Supreme Court in Anuradha Bhasin Vs. Union of India.
  • It was held in order to summarise the criteria of the proportionality theory, which must be followed by authorities before adopting any order curtailing citizens' basic rights.
Applicability

Applicability Of The Doctrine Of Proportionality In India

  • It is a common misperception that judicial review under this approach is the same as an appeal.
  • When an administrative action is challenged on the basis of the doctrine of proportionality, the appellate authority is simply required to determine whether the procedure was correct or if the punishment provided was the least restrictive means to achieve the goal.
  • The Indian legal system has chosen a narrow approach to this theory since a broader doctrine would render the administration's discretionary powers obsolete. It will empower the court to encroach on executive authorities.
  • The court cannot assume the place of the executive and act on its behalf. As a result, India's ideology is ideal for maintaining this status.
Conclusion

Conclusion

There is a misunderstanding concerning how the doctrine of proportionality is used in India. The doctrine of proportionality, it may be claimed, is only used in rare circumstances when the administrative body's penalty is not proportional to the wrongdoing and is of such a kind that it shocks the court's conscience. In addition, the philosophy cannot be utilized to decrease the sentence on the basis of sympathy. The idea of proportionality applies not only to matters involving disciplinary orders, penalties, or basic freedoms but also to situations in which the institution's action was not needed and a less restrictive alternative was available. Thus, the applicability of the doctrine should be rechecked.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cloudbursts and Heavy Rainfall

Introduction   : Sudden, “highly-localised rains” in Amarnath, Jammu and Kashmir, on Friday evening (July 8) caused flooding and led to the deaths of at least 16 people and injuries   to more than 20 others. Those who died were at a camp near the cave, a site of pilgrimage. What is a cloudburst? A cloudburst refers to an extreme amount of rain that happens in a short period, sometimes accompanied by hail and thunder, and this has a precise definition.  The India Meteorological Department (IMD) defines it as unexpected precipitation exceeding 100mm (or 10 cm) per hour over a geographical region of approximately 20 to 30 square km. Significant amounts of rainfall such as this can result in floods . Why do cloudbursts occur in hilly areas like Amarnath? Experts have said it is difficult to predict when exactly a cloudburst will occur, and there is little definitive data on the exact number of cloudbursts that occur in India.  Due to their definition dealing wi...
Read more

Doctrine of Colourable Legislation

  The doctrine of colourable legislation checks if the legislature has transgressed its power mentioned in the constitution. The expression “Colourable Legislation” means “what can’t be done directly, can’t be done indirectly as well”. In this article, we will discuss what is the doctrine of colourable legislation and the famous Supreme Court Judgements in which this doctrine is used to check the validity of the law. Concept Concept of Doctrine of Colourable Legislation Separation of powers entails the division or sharing of power. The Constitution states that each of these organs should exercise diverse powers in order to prevent the misuse of authority by any of the government's organs. As a result, a system of checks and balances emerges. With respect to their respective subjects, the Constitution has split powers between the federal government and the states. However, the legislative body occasionally passes laws that are outside of its purview. This signifies it has oversteppe...
Read more

Doctrine of Laches

  The doctrine of laches is applied by the judiciary to check if the case was brought in front of the court in a reasonable time or not. Laches literally means delay. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the doctrine is based on the maxim that “equity aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights.” Therefore one can claim their legal right in reasonable time and not after a long delay. Concept of Doctrine of Laches This doctrine means that if a prolonged delay in asserting a legal right or claim has harmed the opposing party, the right or claim will not be upheld or permitted. Anyone seeking redress must appear in court within a fair time frame. However, the question is whether fundamental rights can be denied under Article 32 due to a delay. Fundamental rights cannot be withheld just due to inaction, as this is unjustifiable. It is vital for one's personal development. Supreme Court Judgements in which doctrine of laches is used Ravindra Jain vs UOI The supreme court...
Read more