Which of the following is/are included in the Directive Principles of State Policy? 1. Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour. 2. Prohibition of consumption except for medicinal purposes of intoxicating drinks and of other drugs which are injurious to health. Select the correct answer using the code given below: Code:

1. The Philosophy of Part III and Part IV (basic)

To understand the Indian Constitution, one must look at its moral core, often found in Part III and Part IV. Together, they are described as the 'Conscience of the Constitution.' Part III (Fundamental Rights) represents our individual liberties — these are essentially promises that must be kept by the State. If these rights are violated, you have the power to go directly to court for justice Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science-Class VII. NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Constitution of India — An Introduction, p.221. These rights, ranging from the Right to Equality to Constitutional Remedies, are considered 'fundamental' because they ensure the all-round development (material, intellectual, and spiritual) of every individual Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Fundamental Rights, p.74.

In contrast, Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy or DPSP) represents the social and economic goals of our nation. Unlike Fundamental Rights, you cannot sue the government if it fails to meet a DPSP goal immediately; they are non-justiciable. Think of them as 'guidelines' or a roadmap for the government to follow to create a welfare state where everyone enjoys a good standard of living Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science-Class VII. NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Constitution of India — An Introduction, p.221. Interestingly, these principles are heavily influenced by the 'Instruments of Instructions' found in the Government of India Act of 1935, which were directions given to British governors Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., Salient Features of the Constitution, p.34.

While critics like Sir Ivor Jennings argued that these rights lack a consistent philosophy, the framers intended them to balance individual freedom with social justice Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Fundamental Rights, p.105. The fundamental difference lies in their enforcement and their objective: Part III aims at establishing political democracy, while Part IV aims at social and economic democracy.

Feature	Fundamental Rights (Part III)	Directive Principles (Part IV)
Nature	Negative obligations (States 'shall not' interfere)	Positive obligations (State 'should' strive to do)
Enforceability	Justiciable (Enforceable by courts)	Non-justiciable (Not enforceable by courts)
Goal	Political Democracy	Social and Economic Democracy

Sources: Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science-Class VII. NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Constitution of India — An Introduction, p.221; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Fundamental Rights, p.74, 105; Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., Salient Features of the Constitution, p.34

2. Justiciability and Enforceability (basic)

In the study of the Indian Constitution, the terms justiciability and enforceability refer to whether a citizen can approach a court of law to seek a remedy if a specific right or principle is not being upheld by the State. Think of it as the difference between a binding command that a judge can implement and a moral guidance that the government is expected to follow through its own initiative.

Fundamental Rights (Part III) are described as justiciable. This means they are legally enforceable by the courts. If your Fundamental Rights are violated, you have the right to move the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 or a High Court under Article 226 for their protection Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Fundamental Rights, p.98. In contrast, Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) are non-justiciable. Article 37 explicitly states that these principles shall not be enforceable by any court Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.179. This means you cannot file a lawsuit against the government simply because it hasn't yet fulfilled a specific Directive, such as providing a 'living wage' or 'equal pay for equal work.'

The following table highlights the core functional differences between these two pillars of our Constitution:

Feature	Fundamental Rights (Part III)	Directive Principles (Part IV)
Nature	Negative obligations (mostly prohibit the State from doing certain things).	Positive obligations (require the State to do certain things) Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.111.
Justiciability	Justiciable; legally enforceable by courts.	Non-justiciable; not legally enforceable by courts.
Sanction	Legal sanctions (Court orders/Writs).	Political sanctions (Public opinion and elections).

Why this distinction? The framers of our Constitution realized that while political liberties (FRs) could be granted immediately, social and economic goals (DPSPs) required resources, time, and specific legislation. Therefore, a Directive Principle remains a moral obligation until the government passes a specific law to implement it. Once a law is enacted to give effect to a DPSP, that law becomes enforceable, but the DPSP itself remains a guiding light rather than a courtroom tool Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.179.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Fundamental Rights, p.98; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.179; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.111

3. Classification of Directive Principles (intermediate)

To master the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP), we must first understand that the Constitution of India does not formally classify them into categories. However, based on their content and the underlying philosophy they represent, constitutional experts usually divide them into three distinct ideological groups: Socialistic, Gandhian, and Liberal-Intellectual. This classification helps us see the different 'visions' our founders had for the future of India — from the radical social reforms of the Left to the traditional village-centric ideals of Mahatma Gandhi Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.109. The Socialistic Principles aim to provide social and economic justice and establish a welfare state. These include mandates like Article 38, which directs the State to minimize inequalities in income and status, and Article 39, which focuses on the equitable distribution of material resources to prevent the concentration of wealth Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.114. This ideology was heavily pushed by young nationalists like Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhash Chandra Bose, who were inspired by international socialist currents A Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, Emergence of Swarajists, Socialist Ideas, Revolutionary Activities and Other New Forces, p.346. On the other hand, Gandhian Principles reflect the reconstruction program of Mahatma Gandhi. These focus on rural development and moral growth, such as Article 40 (Organizing Village Panchayats) and Article 47 (Prohibition of intoxicating drinks and drugs except for medicinal purposes). Finally, the Liberal-Intellectual Principles represent the ideology of modernism and scientific temper, covering areas like the Uniform Civil Code (Article 44) and the Separation of the Judiciary from the Executive (Article 50) A Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, Making of the Constitution for India, p.616.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.109; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.114; A Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, Emergence of Swarajists, Socialist Ideas, Revolutionary Activities and Other New Forces, p.346; A Brief History of Modern India, Rajiv Ahir, Making of the Constitution for India, p.616

4. Balance and Conflict: FR vs DPSP (intermediate)

The relationship between Fundamental Rights (FRs) and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) has been one of the most dynamic chapters in Indian Constitutional history. At its core, the conflict arises because FRs are justiciable (enforceable by courts), while DPSPs are non-justiciable (moral and political obligations of the State). This created a classic tug-of-war: should the individual’s liberty (FRs) be sacrificed for the collective social good (DPSPs)?

Initially, the judiciary took a literal view. In the Champakam Dorairajan case (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that Fundamental Rights are supreme, and if a law implementing a DPSP violates a Fundamental Right, the DPSP must yield. The Court famously noted that DPSPs must run as "subsidiary" to Fundamental Rights Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.624. However, this sparked a series of constitutional amendments by Parliament to give more weight to social welfare goals, eventually leading to the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction. This doctrine mandates that courts must interpret the Constitution as a whole, ensuring that both FRs and DPSPs are given effect without rendering either "nugatory" (useless) Indian Polity, Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.668.

The definitive resolution came in the landmark Minerva Mills case (1980). The Supreme Court struck down a provision of the 42nd Amendment that tried to give all DPSPs precedence over FRs. The Court held that the Indian Constitution is founded on the "bedrock of the balance" between Part III and Part IV. Giving absolute primacy to one over the other would disturb the Constitution's harmony, which is a part of its Basic Structure Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.629. While some later cases like Sanjeev Coke Co v Bharat Coking (1983) showed slight shifts in judicial emphasis, the Minerva Mills principle remains the standard Introduction to the Constitution of India, HOW THE CONSTITUTION HAS WORKED, p.496.

Feature	Fundamental Rights (Part III)	Directive Principles (Part IV)
Nature	Negative obligations (State must NOT do certain things).	Positive obligations (State SHOULD do certain things).
Goal	Political Democracy.	Social and Economic Democracy.
Current Status	Generally superior, but Articles 39(b) & (c) can override Arts 14 & 19.	Implementation cannot destroy the "Basic Structure" of FRs.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.624; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation, p.668; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.629; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), HOW THE CONSTITUTION HAS WORKED, p.496

5. Rights against Exploitation (Article 23-24) (exam-level)

In the landscape of our Constitution, the Right against Exploitation (Articles 23–24) serves as a vital shield for the most vulnerable. While many Fundamental Rights protect us from the government, these articles are unique because they also protect individuals from exploitation by private persons, such as landlords or contractors Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, p.93. This is essential in a country like India, where deep-rooted socio-economic inequalities historicaly allowed powerful individuals to dominate the weak.

Article 23 specifically prohibits three things: traffic in human beings, begar, and other similar forms of forced labour. "Traffic" refers to the dehumanizing practice of buying and selling men, women, or children like goods, including immoral traffic and slavery. Begar is a term for compulsory work without any remuneration—a practice often seen in the old Zamindari system Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT, p.37. Crucially, the Supreme Court has interpreted "forced labour" to include not just physical force, but also economic compulsion, such as being forced to work for less than the minimum wage Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, p.93.

Article 24 focuses on the protection of childhood by prohibiting the employment of children below the age of 14 years in any factory, mine, or other hazardous occupations like construction or railways Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT, p.31. While these are Fundamental Rights that the State must enforce, they work in tandem with the Directive Principles (DPSPs). For example, while Article 23 prohibits forced labour, DPSP Article 47 directs the State to raise the level of nutrition and standard of living, addressing the poverty that often leads to such exploitation in the first place.

However, Article 23 contains a specific exception: the State can impose compulsory service for public purposes (like military or social service). When doing so, the State is not required to pay, but it must not discriminate solely on grounds of religion, race, caste, or class Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, p.138.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Fundamental Rights, p.93; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties, p.138; Indian Constitution at Work, NCERT, Rights in the Indian Constitution, p.31, 37

6. Public Health and Prohibition (Article 47) (exam-level)

At the heart of a Welfare State lies the responsibility to ensure that its citizens are not just surviving, but thriving. Article 47 of the Indian Constitution is the primary vehicle for this vision. It imposes a primary duty on the State to achieve three interconnected goals: raising the level of nutrition, improving the standard of living, and the overall improvement of public health Exploring Society: India and Beyond, The Constitution of India — An Introduction, p.222. This article reflects both Socialist goals (welfare through nutrition) and Gandhian ideals (moral and physical health through temperance).

A distinctive feature of Article 47 is its specific directive regarding prohibition. The State is encouraged to endeavor to bring about the prohibition of the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs which are injurious to health, except when used for medicinal purposes. It is important to note that while the Constitution provides this directive, it is not a Fundamental Right that a citizen can enforce in court; rather, it is a policy goal. Historically, while some provinces had prohibition laws even before 1950, the inclusion of Article 47 led the Planning Commission to formulate more structured schemes, eventually leading several states to introduce prohibition either fully or partially Introduction to the Constitution of India, Directive Principles of State Policy, p.187.

Students often confuse Article 47 with Article 23, but they serve very different legal purposes. Article 23 is a Fundamental Right that prohibits human trafficking and forced labour (begar), whereas Article 47 is a Directive Principle focused on health and consumption Introduction to the Constitution of India, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES, p.138. From a rights perspective, one cannot claim a "right" to consume injurious drugs or tobacco. Since medical research shows these substances harm both the individual and society, they fall outside the scope of protected personal liberties Political Theory, Class XI, Rights, p.69.

Feature	Article 47 (DPSP)	Article 23 (Fundamental Right)
Focus	Public health, nutrition, and prohibition.	Prohibition of trafficking and forced labour.
Enforceability	Non-justiciable (Directive to the State).	Justiciable (Enforceable in Courts).
Nature	Affirmative duty to improve society.	Protection against exploitation.

Sources: Exploring Society: India and Beyond, Social Science-Class VII. NCERT(Revised ed 2025), The Constitution of India — An Introduction, p.222; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), Directive Principles of State Policy, p.187; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES, p.138; Political Theory, Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.), Rights, p.69

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the structural differences between Part III and Part IV of the Constitution, this question serves as the ultimate test of your ability to categorize constitutional provisions. The core building block here is distinguishing between Fundamental Rights (FR), which are individualistic and justiciable, and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP), which are collective goals for the State. Statement 1, which prohibits traffic in human beings, is a shield for individual dignity under Article 23, while Statement 2, concerning the prohibition of intoxicating drinks, is a policy mandate for the State's social welfare agenda under Article 47.

To arrive at the correct answer, you must apply a simple logic: Does this provision represent a right I can enforce in a court of law, or is it a directive for the government's policy-making? The prohibition of forced labour is a civil protection that you learned is part of the Right against Exploitation (a Fundamental Right). In contrast, the regulation of intoxicating substances is an aspirational social reform that the State endeavours to achieve. Therefore, only the second statement is a DPSP, leading us directly to (B) 2 only as the correct choice.

UPSC frequently uses the "moral overlap" trap, presenting two statements that both seem socially beneficial to see if you can identify their specific legal home. Option (C) is a common pitfall for students who realize both statements sound like "prohibitions" but forget that Statement 1 is explicitly listed as a Fundamental Right in Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu. Always remember: if the provision focuses on an individual's immediate protection from the state or others, it is likely an FR; if it focuses on state-led social engineering, it is likely a DPSP.