UNLOCKING ARTICLE 12: EXTENDING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS TO THE ACTS OF PRIVATE ENTITIES

The Indian Constitution under Part III provides fundamental rights to both citizens and non-citizens. Article 12 under Part III defines State and also indicates that a person can approach a Supreme Court under Article 32 or the High Courts under Article 226 if his fundamental rights are being infringed by the institutions that are mentioned under this Article. This creates a situation wherein a person working under a private entity is deprived of their right to approach the higher courts when their fundamental rights enshrined under the Constitution are infringed by the private companies. This paper through a doctrinal study explores the evolving interpretation of “State” under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution, specifically focusing on the judicial trend of including private entities within its ambit. It analyses landmark Supreme Court judgments, such as R.D. Shetty v. International airport authority of India and Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, which established the “deep and pervasive control” test. The study also examines subsequent rulings that expanded the criteria beyond direct governmental control to include public function and state-like activities. The paper argues that this judicial expansion, while protecting fundamental rights against the actions of powerful private actors, raises questions about the scope of judicial review and the balance between public law and private autonomy. It concludes that a clear, consistent framework is needed to define the criteria for classifying private bodies as “State” to ensure legal certainty and prevent arbitrary application, while upholding the constitutional mandate to protect fundamental rights.

Key Words: Article 12, Fundamental Rights, Constitution, Private Companies, Infringement.