The Indian Constitution is not a mere lawyer's document. It is a vehicle of life, and its spirit is always the spirit of the age. How has the constitution of India adapted to changing socio-economic and political circumstances over the decades?

(b) Promotes Unity & Integrity of the nation

How various constitutional provisions promote fraternity among all citizens:

Our Constitution makers, by incorporating Art 368, sought to make the Constitution flexible enough so that it could adapt to changing times.

Why such flexibility was incorporated:

Because Constitution is not a mere lawyer's document => no list collection of laws

=> Instead, it's a vehicle of life [i.e., impacts and transforms economic, social and political lives of citizens]

=> it's spirit is always the spirit of the age => reflects the changing times through constitutional morality

(a) Privacy as a concept not popular at the time of framing constitution but now a Fundamental Right [Puttswammy Judgement]

How the constitution adapted to changing socio-economic and political circumstances:

Modes of adaptation:

=> Amendments under Art 368

=> Judicial Review by judiciary clarifying & modifying provisions

(A) Changing socio-economic circumstances & subsequent adaptations:

=> To address irregularities, many panel reforms conducted

o 1st Constitutional Amendment enacted to restrict right to property from schedule added

o 4th Schedule added to protect laws pertaining to land reforms from judicial review

=> Right to Education (Art 21A) added via 86th Amendment Act to promote education

=> 101st Amendment => GST implemented to address taxation related issues

(B) Changing Political circumstances:

=> Basic Structure Doctrine propounded in Kesavananda Bharati case to reduce possibility of totalitarianism

=> 73rd & 74th Amendment to institutions to loosen local self government

=> 106th Amendment to reserve seats for women in legislatures => because of growing importance of women

The constitution both grants Right to Freedom as a Fundamental Right (Art 19), as well as placing reasonable restrictions on them.

To what extent does this achieve a balance between individual liberty and societal interests:

Every citizen has freedom of speech & expression, but reasonably restricted expression as per contempt of court, maintain for defamation, contempt of court maintain pub order etc

=> Thus these is reasonable balance struck individual liberty & societal interests.

However the specificity of what is reasonable & what is not is often decided on a case by case basis by judiciary [under Art 13] through judicial review

Factors considered in evaluating reasonableness of such restrictions:

(a) "Doctrine of Proportionality" given by supreme court in Navtej Johar case - delivers these factors: "Immaturity"

[E.9) In Minerva Mills case, SC declared amendment (42nd), certain provisions which restricted individual rights as violating Basic Structure => declared Art 26C over all FRs]

[E.g) In Shreya Singhal case, SC deemed section of IT Act was too vague and arbitrary

[E.g) In Annadatha Paripalak case, SC declared the internal emergency to be too severe.

Thus, the judiciary maintains the dynamic balance between individual rights & societal interest.