Horizontal Application of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental rights are primarily vertical rights, protecting individuals against the State, but some also operate horizontally against private persons or organisations. Horizontal application may be direct, where the Constitution itself binds private actors, or indirect, where courts require the State to protect individuals through legislation, regulation and remedies.

Constitutional position

Most fundamental rights regulate the State as defined in Article 12. However, the Constitution expressly gives certain rights horizontal reach.

• Article 15(2) prohibits specified forms of discrimination in access to shops, public restaurants, hotels, places of public entertainment and certain public facilities.
• Article 17 abolishes untouchability and forbids its practice in any form.
• Article 23 prohibits trafficking, begar and similar forced labour, whether imposed by the State or private persons.
• Article 24 prohibits employing children below fourteen years in factories, mines or other hazardous employment.

Judicial expansion

The Supreme Court has combined direct enforcement with the State's positive obligation to protect rights from private interference.

• In People's Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, 1982, the Court held that Article 23 is enforceable against private persons and that the State must secure compliance.
• In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, 1997, the Court issued safeguards against sexual harassment that bound public and private workplaces until legislation was enacted.
• In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2017, the Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right and acknowledged threats from both State and non-state actors.
• The majority in Kaushal Kishor v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2023 held that rights under Articles 19 and 21 may be enforced even against persons other than the State or its instrumentalities.

Extent and remedial limits

Horizontal enforceability is not unlimited. A private wrong does not automatically become a constitutional violation; many disputes remain governed by criminal, civil, labour, anti-discrimination or data-protection law.

• Constitutional remedies under Articles 32 and 226 depend on the right violated and the duty owed.
• A writ under Article 226 can reach a private body when it performs a public duty, but ordinarily not for a purely private contractual dispute.
• Indirect horizontality remains important because courts can require the State to prevent, investigate and remedy private interference with fundamental rights.