What Counts as Untouchability Under Article 17?

The Indian Constitution directly addresses the practice of untouchability. Article 17 says that untouchability is abolished and forbids its practice in any form. It is a punishable offence to enforce any disability that results from untouchability. The Constitution does not define untouchability. Courts and Parliament must give it meaning.

This legal position came from a sharp disagreement in the freedom movement. Mahatma Gandhi saw the removal of untouchability mainly as a moral and religious reform. He started his Harijan campaign and anti-untouchability league. He wanted to change the thinking of caste Hindus. He insisted that temples be opened to all. B.R. Ambedkar disagreed with this approach. He argued that caste itself, not only untouchability, had to be destroyed. He pushed for separate electorates for the depressed classes. This was the term then used for Dalits. He wanted them to have independent political power. This disagreement was resolved through the Poona Pact of 1932. It was a compromise. Separate electorates were replaced with reserved seats in joint electorates. This shaped the reservation system that independent India later adopted. After this pact, Gandhi formally included the upliftment of Harijans in his political programme. At the same time, E.V. Ramaswami Naicker (Periyar) founded the Self-Respect Movement in the Madras Presidency. It campaigned against caste rigidities and Brahmanical ritual. It worked outside the Congress-led mainstream.

Parliament gave legal power to Article 17 through the Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955. It was renamed the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 after a major 1976 amendment. Later, the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was added. It created separate criminal offences. These offences are more serious. They cover caste-based humiliation and violence.