Forced labour or beggar is a violation of which one of the following Articles of the Constitution of India?

Correct — D, (d) Article 23. Article 23 is the constitutional prohibition of forced labour. Its first clause provides that traffic in human beings and begar and other similar forms of forced labour are prohibited, and that any contravention of the provision shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law. One point of vocabulary needs clearing up, because the English column of this booklet prints the word as beggar, with two g’s, which is a different English word meaning a person who begs. The word the Constitution uses, and the practice the question is about, is begar — the customary exaction of labour without payment, of the kind a landlord or a local official could demand from villagers as a matter of right. The Hindi column of the same paper prints it correctly as begar, so the two columns of the booklet do not agree on this word; the misprint changes nothing about the answer. Two further points are worth carrying away. Article 23 is one of the few fundamental rights that operates against private persons and not only against the State, which is what makes it usable against landlords, contractors and employers. And clause (2) contains a saving: the State may impose compulsory service for public purposes, but in doing so it must not discriminate on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class. Article 23 sits with Article 24, on the employment of children in factories and mines, under the heading Right against Exploitation.

Why the others are wrong

• (a)Article 16 — Article 16 guarantees equality of opportunity in matters of public employment: no citizen may be discriminated against in respect of employment or office under the State on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, descent, place of birth or residence. Its later clauses allow reservations for backward classes not adequately represented in the services and, in prescribed cases, in promotion. It is about who may be appointed to public office, not about the conditions under which labour may be exacted, and its neighbourhood in the Constitution — the equality group of Articles 14 to 18 — is a different one from the right against exploitation.
• (b)Article 17 — Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form, and provides that the enforcement of any disability arising out of untouchability shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law. It is enforced through the Protection of Civil Rights Act and, for aggravated offences, the legislation on atrocities against Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The confusion with Article 23 is understandable, since forced labour was in practice often exacted from the same communities, but constitutionally the two are separate prohibitions with separate enforcement machinery.
• (c)Article 19 — Article 19 confers the freedoms of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession or trade, each subject to reasonable restrictions on stated grounds. The right to property was originally the seventh of these freedoms and was removed by the Forty-fourth Amendment in 1978. Article 19 is the article a candidate reaches for when he thinks of a right to work, but the freedom it protects is the freedom to practise a profession or carry on a trade, not a protection against being compelled to labour, which is Article 23’s subject.

Articles 23 and 24 together form the Right against Exploitation. Article 23 outlaws three things — traffic in human beings, begar, and other similar forms of forced labour — and makes contravention a criminal offence, while permitting compulsory service for public purposes on a non-discriminatory basis. Article 24 forbids the employment of children below fourteen in any factory or mine or in other hazardous employment. Article 23 is unusual in two respects that recruitment papers like to test. First, it binds private persons as well as the State, so a bonded labourer or a trafficked person can invoke it directly against the individual exploiting him. Second, the Supreme Court has read force widely: in the case arising out of the construction work for the Asian Games in Delhi, the Court held that labour obtained by paying less than the minimum wage is forced labour within the meaning of the Article, because economic compulsion is compulsion. The statutory framework built on the Article includes the abolition of the bonded labour system in 1976 and the legislation against trafficking, and it is enforced alongside labour statutes on wages and working conditions.

Key facts

• Article 23(1) prohibits traffic in human beings, begar and other similar forms of forced labour, and makes contravention an offence punishable by law.
• Begar means labour or service exacted without payment, the customary unpaid labour demanded by landlords and local officials.
• Article 23(2) permits the State to impose compulsory service for public purposes, but forbids discrimination in doing so on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class.
• Article 23 is enforceable against private individuals as well as against the State, which is what makes it effective against bonded labour.
• The Supreme Court has held that paying less than the minimum wage amounts to forced labour under Article 23, in the case arising from the Asian Games construction work in Delhi.
• Articles 23 and 24 together constitute the Right against Exploitation; Article 24 bars the employment of children below fourteen in factories, mines and hazardous work.
• The Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976 is the principal statute enacted to give effect to the prohibition of forced labour.

Common traps

• Confusing begar with begging. The Article is about unpaid forced labour, not about mendicancy, and the English column of this paper prints the word incorrectly.
• Reaching for Article 19 because it contains the freedom to carry on a trade or profession. That is a freedom to work, not a protection against being made to work.
• Forgetting the saving in clause (2), which allows compulsory service for public purposes.
• Assuming every fundamental right operates only against the State. Articles 17, 23 and 24 reach private conduct.

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Articles 23 and 24 of the Constitution of India together constitute which of the following?

  • (a)The Right to Equality
  • (b)The Right against Exploitation
  • (c)The Right to Freedom of Religion
  • (d)The Right to Constitutional Remedies

  Answer(b) The Right against Exploitation

• practice — not a real PYQ

  Under Article 23(2) of the Constitution, the State may impose compulsory service for public purposes subject to which condition?

  • (a)That it is imposed only in an emergency
  • (b)That Parliament approves it by resolution
  • (c)That no discrimination is made on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class
  • (d)That the persons served are paid double the minimum wage

  Answer(c) That no discrimination is made on grounds only of religion, race, caste or class