Create comprehensive policy framework to provide legal aid to all Indian citizens, HC tells Centre

Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has directed the Centre to create a comprehensive and feasible policy framework to provide legal aid to its citizens not only within the Indian territory but also outside.

The court was hearing a petition filed by A. Malarvizhi alias Kottaithai of Virudhunagar district, whose husband Ayyappan Marimuthu, employed in Cameroon in Central Africa, died in 2021. His employer company undertook to pay a compensation for family support. However, it did not honour the undertaking. Hence, she filed the present petition.

Justice Swaminathan observed that Article 38(1) of the Constitution declared that the State should strive to promote the welfare of the people. The Central and the State governments had not taken any proactive stance. Therefore, the court was constrained to look for a jurisprudential basis for casting liability on the Centre.

Article 51A(f) of the Constitution mandated that it should be the duty of every citizen of India to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture. When principles and doctrines could be borrowed from other jurisdictions and international conventions and covenants, there could not be any objection for invoking principles from our ancient jurisprudence. Of course, with one caveat. Nothing that ran counter to constitutional morality or statutory prescription could be relied upon, the judge said.

“Justice M. Rama Jois has written on the Legal and Constitutional History of India. Volume I of the Book contains a chapter on the duties of a king (Rajadharma). Kautilya declares that in the happiness of his subjects lies the king’s happiness ; in their welfare his welfare… whatever pleases his subjects, the king shall consider as good. Manu declares that the highest duty of a king is to protect his subjects. The king who receives the prescribed taxes (from his subjects) and protects them, alone acts according to Dharma. We need to substitute the expression ‘Government’ for the word ‘king’. An identical duty of the monarch to ensure the welfare of its people is also enshrined in Buddhist literature”, the judge said.

He said there had been a migration of labour across the continents. As a result, the government was earning a huge foreign exchange by way of inward remittances. When the government was receiving such benefits from the migrant workers, it had a correlative and corresponding duty to rush to their rescue when issues arose out of such overseas employment. In Shanthi Parva of Mahabharatha, it was stated that the king who received one-sixth of the income and still failed to protect the people became a sinner.

“I wondered if it would be in order to cite such verses from the Mahabharatha and Arthasastra. If Latin maxims can be quoted and judgments can rest on them, one need not shy away from citing our own heritage and sources which can be in Sanskrit or Tamil or any Indian language”, the judge said.

“I infer that the Central government has a constitutional duty in the matter. The absence of a legislative framework need not come in the way of arriving at such an inference. The constitutional provisions and the Preamble construed in the light of the doctrine of Rajadharma postulate that the Central government has a duty to provide legal aid to its citizens not only within the territory of India but also outside”, the judge said.

The petitioner was a poor widow. Her survival was at stake. She had to bring up her young child. It was, therefore, the duty of the Centre to play a proactive role. It might have to take up the matter at the highest echelons of the Government of Cameroon. If necessary, a legal battle might have to be waged. It was for the Centre to explore every possible avenue to secure redress for the petitioner expeditiously, the judge directed.