PolitySphere

1. Background: The Concept of the “State”

Before looking at Article 12, we must first understand what the term “State” usually means in political theory.

Traditional Definitions of State

Max Weber defined the State as a political organization with a monopoly over the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.

Aristotle called the State a political association that exists for the highest good of its citizens.

In modern political science, the State is seen as a combination of four essential elements:

1. Population


2. Territory


3. Government


4. Sovereignty





Thus, in general political theory, “State” refers to the broader political entity that rules a people within defined borders.


—

2. Constitution Perspective: State under Article 12

The Indian Constitution, however, does not use the word “State” in this broad, political theory sense. Instead, it gives a specific, functional, and narrower definition in Article 12, applicable only to Part III of the Constitution (Fundamental Rights).

Article 12 text:
“In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires, the State includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.”

Key Features of Article 12

1. It is an inclusive definition – not exhaustive. The word “includes” suggests that the ambit of “State” may expand through judicial interpretation.


2. Covers multiple organs:

Government of India

Parliament (Union Legislature)

State Governments

State Legislatures

Local Authorities (municipalities, panchayats, etc.)

“Other Authorities” – an open-ended category.



3. Purpose: To identify who can be sued for violation of Fundamental Rights under Part III.



This makes Article 12 a gateway provision for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. If a body is considered “State” under Article 12, then its actions are subject to judicial review under Articles 32 and 226.


—

3. Distinction: Political Theory vs Article 12 Definition

In political science: The State is a sovereign political entity.

In Article 12: The “State” is any authority, government body, or agency (even non-sovereign) that can affect the enjoyment of Fundamental Rights.


Thus, Article 12 broadens accountability—it is not restricted to the Union and State governments but extends to semi-government bodies, statutory corporations, and even private organizations that perform public functions.


—

4. Judicial Interpretation: Landmark Cases

(a) Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967)

First major case where the Supreme Court held that statutory bodies like the Electricity Board fall under “State.”

Reason: They are created by law, have power to make rules/regulations, and perform functions of public importance.


👉 Importance: Opened the way for including statutory corporations under Article 12.


—

(b) Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib (1981)

Concerned with whether a society registered under Societies Registration Act (running a government-funded engineering college) was “State.”

Court laid down tests to determine if a body is “State”:

1. Entire share capital owned by Government.


2. Deep and pervasive control by Government.


3. Monopoly status conferred by law.


4. Functions of public importance closely related to governmental functions.


5. If the body is created by statute or under statute.




👉 Importance: Even a non-statutory body can be “State” if it is heavily controlled/financed by the government and performs public duties.


—

(c) Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002, 7-Judge Bench)

Clarified the tests in Ajay Hasia.

Held that the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) is “State” because the government exercises deep and pervasive control.


👉 Importance: Reinforced that substance of control, not form of organization, determines inclusion under Article 12.


—

5. Conclusion

Article 12 performs a critical role in the constitutional scheme: it identifies the entities against whom Fundamental Rights can be enforced. By adopting an inclusive definition, courts have ensured that citizens are protected not only against the State in its political sense, but also against powerful public bodies, statutory corporations, and even private institutions performing public functions.

Thus, Article 12 reflects India’s constitutional commitment that rights should not be hollow—any authority affecting them must remain accountable under the Constitution.