Kaushal Kishore V. State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors: Fundamental Rights Lie Not Only Against The State But Also Against Non-State Actors

Nafeesa Haneen, Jamia Millia Islamia

Fundamental rights aim to safeguard the intrinsic dignity and vital freedoms of individuals, ensuring they can experience life with liberty, equality, and justice. The Constitution of India guarantees six fundamental rights to its citizens, outlined in Articles 14 to 32. A relatively recent Supreme Court judgment in the case of Kaushal Kishore v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others has garnered attention. It says fundamental rights can be lied not only against the state but also against non-state actors. In the case at hand, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court declared that the fundamental rights outlined in Articles 19 and 21 are enforceable against individuals and entities beyond just the state and its instrumentalities. This means that a fundamental right under Article 19 or 21 can be upheld even against non-state actors. Apparently, this judgment is against the common perception that fundamental rights can be enforced only against state actors.

A brief understanding of the difference between state actors and non-state actors will aid in this research. The difference between state actors and non-state actors is decisive in the context of the enforceability of fundamental rights. State actors include government bodies and officials who are forthrightly bound by constitutional mandates to uphold and protect fundamental rights. Non-state actors, on the other hand, encompass individuals, organizations, and entities that operate autonomously of the government. Traditionally, fundamental rights have been enforceable mainly against state actors because of their authoritative power and public responsibilities. However, recent legal developments and judicial interpretations have begun to acknowledge that non-state actors can also violate these rights. Consequently, the enforceability of fundamental rights against non-state actors is evolving to provide comprehensive protection of individuals' rights across various contexts. The purpose of fundamental rights was always to protect the rights of citizens of the nation against the state. "The scope of the definition of the State and its instrumentalities has evolved over time through numerous judicial pronouncements.". In the case above mentioned, Kaushal Kishore v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others the court gave a proper exegesis on the enforceability of fundamental rights against non-state actors as well, apart from state actors. The learned counsel exhaustively interpreted the enforceability of fundamental rights against the non-state actors particularly.