6.2.1 Language as a Fundamental Right
In Indian legal research and literature, the aspect of language rights as a fundamental right is predominantly enshrined in various provisions of the Constitution, affirming the significance of language as a crucial aspect of individual identity and expression. While the Constitution does not explicitly mention language rights as a standalone fundamental right, several articles collectively safeguard and ensure linguistic diversity, preserving the rights of individuals concerning language usage.
Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of Speech and Expression
This fundamental right ensures that every citizen has the freedom of speech and expression. Language serves as a crucial medium for expressing thoughts and opinions, and this article implicitly protects an individual’s right to express themselves in the language of their choice.
Article 29(1): Protection of Interests of Minorities
Article 29(1) guarantees the right of minorities to conserve their distinct language, script, or culture. It safeguards the rights of linguistic minorities to preserve and develop their languages without any discrimination.
**Article 30: Cultural and Educational Rights of Minorities
Article 30 ensures the right of minorities, whether based on language or religion, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. This provision is crucial in preserving linguistic diversity by allowing minorities to impart education in their language.
Article 347 and Article 350: Linguistic Rights
Article 347 empowers states to adapt any language used for official purposes within their territory, and Article 350 ensures the right of citizens to present their grievances to the government in any language.
Supreme Court Interpretations:
The Indian judiciary, especially the Supreme Court, has played a significant role in interpreting and upholding language rights as part of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Various judgments have emphasized the importance of language in preserving cultural and individual identity.
The Constitution, through these provisions, implicitly acknowledges the significance of language as an integral part of an individual’s identity, culture, and expression. It ensures the protection and promotion of linguistic diversity by granting citizens the right to use their language in education, communication with the government, and the preservation of their cultural heritage.
Moreover, while the Constitution primarily focuses on rights concerning language, subsequent legislative measures and policies have been enacted to further reinforce and safeguard language rights. Acts such as the Official Languages Act, Language Acts by states, and the establishment of language commissions demonstrate India’s commitment to protecting linguistic diversity and ensuring language rights as an inherent aspect of fundamental rights.
6.2.2 Case Studies on Language Rights
Several case studies in Indian legal history exemplify the significance of language rights and their interpretations within the constitutional framework. These cases have played a pivotal role in shaping and upholding language rights as enshrined in the Indian Constitution:
State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951):
This case is significant for addressing language-based discrimination in educational institutions. The Supreme Court ruled that caste-based reservations violated Article 15(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, caste, sex, or place of birth. Though not explicitly about language, this case laid the foundation for protecting minorities’ rights, including linguistic minorities, against discrimination.
S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994):
In this landmark case, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of preserving linguistic and cultural diversity in India. The judgment reiterated that secularism is a basic feature of the Constitution and that respecting linguistic diversity is essential for maintaining the unity and integrity of the nation.
Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009):
This case highlighted the right of an accused to have the FIR (First Information Report) and other documents related to the case translated into a language they understand. The Supreme Court ruled that language barriers should not hinder an individual’s access to justice and fair trial.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973):
Although primarily addressing the doctrine of basic structure, this case indirectly reinforced the importance of cultural and linguistic diversity in the Indian polity. It upheld federalism and cultural pluralism as part of the basic structure of the Constitution, indirectly safeguarding language rights within the framework of the Indian Union.
P.A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra (2005):
While predominantly dealing with the autonomy of private educational institutions in admission procedures, this case indirectly touches upon language rights by affirming the rights of linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice under Article 30 of the Constitution.