The principles of natural justice have been recognised as a crucial facet of the right to equality before law under Art. 14, wherein it is essential that each individual has been given an adequate and reasonable opportunity to be heard in the court of law prior to any official decision taken by the court. Furthermore, no person can be a judge in his own case. The judicial approach has seen that the adherence to the principles is essential for a just, due process of the law. While Art. 14 does provide for the equality before the law, and the same has been held as an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution; it ought to be noted that Art. 14 has another limb in the equal protection of the laws. The law provides for a positive discrimination based on an intelligible differentia with a rational nexus in order to achieve the objective that is sought. The State as well as the courts of law have laid down various exceptions to the right to be heard in certain extraordinary circumstances. These exceptions are either explicitly provided in statutes, or have been implicit and thereby, been interpreted by the Supreme Court in several cases. This paper provides for a critical analysis of the scope of the principles of natural justice under Art. 14 of the Constitution by elucidating the exceptions to the principles and analysing the rationale for the same. The author has further provided the various judicial approaches to the concept and the validity of the same in light of the due process of law. The constitutional validity of the exceptions has been explored by providing various illustrations that provide sufficient, lucid arguments to assert the same. The author has concluded by providing a critical analysis of the scope of the exceptions in relation to Art. 14 and the justifications for the same.
