Article 47 of Constitution of India

The Constitution of India embodies several provisions aimed at ensuring social and economic justice for all its citizens. One such provision is Article 47, a part of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). It emphasizes the State’s responsibility to raise the level of nutrition, improve public health, and prohibit the consumption of intoxicating substances except for medicinal purposes. While not legally enforceable, Article 47 reflects the moral obligations of the State, influencing policies aimed at improving the well-being of society.

Text and Definition of Article 47

Article 47 states:
“The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular, the State shall endeavor to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious to health.”

In essence, this Article:

• Recognizes public health and nutrition as fundamental to the quality of life.
• Assigns a duty to the State to focus on the welfare of its citizens.
• Seeks to eliminate harmful substances that degrade the physical and mental health of individuals.

Objectives of Article 47

• Improving Public Health: The primary aim is to ensure better access to healthcare, sanitation, and hygiene. Public health is considered a cornerstone for societal progress.
• Raising Standards of Living: By advocating for improved nutrition and living conditions, the Article aligns with the broader goal of securing social and economic justice.
• Prohibition of Intoxicants: Recognizing the adverse effects of drugs and alcohol, the Article stresses the need to restrict their consumption unless for medicinal purposes.
• Social Welfare: Article 47 envisions a society that prioritizes well-being over profits from harmful industries such as alcohol and drug production.

Historical Background and Evolution of Article 47 of Constitution

The origins of Article 47 trace back to the debates during the Constituent Assembly. Initially drafted as Article 38 in 1948, it was aimed at addressing the high mortality rates and poor living conditions prevalent in post-independence India.

The provision was debated extensively, with members agreeing on the necessity of prohibiting intoxicating substances and promoting welfare measures. It was also recognized that improving health and nutrition would require State intervention and long-term planning.

Scope and Implementation of Article 47

Public Health and Nutrition

Article 47 underscores the State’s obligation to:

• Enhance healthcare infrastructure.
• Provide access to nutritious food, particularly for vulnerable sections of society.
• Implement welfare programs such as the National Health Mission and Mid-Day Meal Scheme, which cater to the health and educational needs of children and women.

Standard of Living

The standard of living is linked to Article 21, which guarantees the right to life. By improving nutrition, reducing poverty, and addressing health disparities, the State can fulfill its constitutional duties under Article 47.

Prohibition of Intoxicants

The Article advocates for the prohibition of intoxicating substances, aligning with the State’s role in protecting public health. However, the issue remains contentious due to:

• Economic dependence on industries like alcohol production.
• Challenges in regulating and enforcing bans effectively.

Judicial Interpretation and Key Cases on Article 47 of Constitution

The judiciary has played a significant role in interpreting and enforcing the principles outlined in Article 47. Below are some landmark cases:

Vincent Panikurlangara v. Union of India (1987)

The Supreme Court in Vincent Panikurlangara v. Union of India emphasized that public health should be a priority for the State. The Court recognized health as a foundational element for societal development, highlighting its role in fostering national growth.

State of Punjab v. Ram Lubhaya (1998)

State of Punjab v. Ram Lubhaya case underlined the State’s duty to safeguard the health and welfare of its citizens. It linked the right to health with the obligations imposed on the State by Article 47, reiterating the importance of government action in this domain.

Ratlam Municipal Corporation v. Vardichand (1980)

The Court in Ratlam Municipal Corporation v. Vardichand reinforced the need for hygienic living conditions as a fundamental aspect of the standard of living. Citizens were granted the right to hold authorities accountable if they failed to provide basic amenities, making public sanitation a legal obligation for the State.

Ugar Sugar Works Ltd. v. Delhi Administration (2001)

The Supreme Court in Ugar Sugar Works Ltd. v. Delhi Administration ruled that there is no fundamental right to trade in intoxicating substances. The judgment reaffirmed the State’s authority to regulate or prohibit such trades in accordance with Article 47, prioritizing public health over commercial interests.

State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu (2017)

The Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu issued a nationwide ban on liquor shops within 500 meters of national and state highways to curb alcohol-related accidents and deaths. However, this decision faced widespread criticism for judicial overreach, leading to subsequent modifications in order to address economic and practical concerns.

Case Study: Bihar Liquor Ban (2016)

The Bihar government imposed a statewide liquor ban in 2016, citing Article 47. However:

• The Patna High Court overturned the ban, stating that the regulation of liquor was within the State’s discretion, not the judiciary’s.
• The case highlighted the challenges of enforcing prohibition in a federal structure.

Contemporary Relevance of Article 47

While not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the right to health has been interpreted as part of Article 21. Article 47 complements this by guiding the State to prioritize healthcare initiatives.

Programs like the Food Security Act and efforts to combat malnutrition directly align with Article 47’s objectives. The emphasis on setting up food regulators and ensuring quality food is vital for improving the standard of living.

The rise of non-communicable diseases such as diabetes and heart conditions underscores the need for public health initiatives rooted in Article 47.

Debates over the regulation of intoxicants continue to evoke discussions on the scope and intent of Article 47. Policymakers must balance health concerns with economic and social realities.

Conclusion

Article 47 of the Indian Constitution reflects the aspirational goals of a welfare state, emphasizing the importance of public health, nutrition, and a dignified standard of living. While not legally enforceable, it serves as a guiding principle for policymakers to design and implement welfare initiatives.

Despite its limitations, Article 47 has influenced significant legislative and judicial developments. However, its ambiguous stance on prohibition and reliance on political will pose challenges to its effective implementation. Moving forward, the State must address these challenges to fulfill the objectives of Article 47 and ensure a healthier, more equitable society.