Madras High Court Directs Centre to Frame Policy to Assist Indians Abroad, Invokes Rajadharma

Chennai: The Madras High Court(Malarvizhi Vs Secretary, Government of India) has directed the Union Government to consider framing a comprehensive policy to provide assistance and protection to Indians residing or working abroad, observing that the State’s constitutional responsibility towards its citizens does not cease at national borders.

The Court invoked the ancient Indian principles of Rajadharma, referring to the teachings of Kautilya (Chanakya) and Manu, to underline that the foremost duty of governance is to safeguard the welfare, dignity, and rights of citizens.

Background of the Case

The petition before the High Court highlighted the hardships faced by Indian citizens abroad, including cases of employment exploitation, detention, lack of legal aid, and absence of effective institutional support mechanisms. The petitioner sought directions for formulation of a structured policy to assist overseas Indians, particularly migrant workers and other vulnerable groups.

Observations of the Madras High Court

The Court observed that:

• The State cannot disclaim responsibility for citizens merely because they are located outside India.
• The right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution extends to Indian citizens abroad, subject to international law and diplomatic limitations.
• A welfare State must take proactive measures to protect the interests of its nationals in foreign jurisdictions.

Invocation of Rajadharma

Referring to Kautilya’s Arthashastra and Manusmriti, the Court noted that ancient Indian jurisprudence placed citizen welfare at the core of governance. These principles, the Court held, remain relevant in interpreting constitutional obligations in contemporary governance.

Direction to the Union Government

While refraining from issuing a mandatory writ, the High Court directed the Centre to:

• Examine the feasibility of framing a uniform policy to assist Indians abroad.
• Strengthen existing support systems through Indian embassies and consulates.
• Ensure coordination between the Ministries of External Affairs, Labour, and Social Welfare.

Relevant Constitutional Provisions

• Article 21, Constitution of India – Protection of life, liberty, and dignity.
• Article 14 – Equality before law and non-arbitrary State action.

Relevant Case Law

• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 – Expanded Article 21 to include dignity, fairness, and reasonableness.
• People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982) 3 SCC 235 – Affirmed State responsibility to protect vulnerable citizens.
• National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh (1996) 1 SCC 742 – Held that constitutional protections require proactive State intervention to safeguard life and liberty.

Legal Significance

The judgment reinforces the evolving understanding of State accountability in a globalised context, particularly where citizens migrate for employment or education. It underscores the expectation that constitutional governance must adapt to transnational realities while preserving human dignity.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.