I am probably simplifying a complex situation, but this is the way I see it. There are several laws in India that govern the financial behavior of individuals - what securities they can buy in foreign markets, that they cannot buy stock on margin in foreign markets, and so on. All of these laws forbid individuals from using their own money as they please in other markets despite India's interests not being affected adversely in any manner. The preamble to the constitution of India guarantees justice, equality, and liberty to all citizens. Isn't the liberty (freedom of choice) of citizens being violated by the aforementioned laws? Are these laws even constitutional given that the constitution is interpreted literally? They appear to me to be an instance of legislative overreach.


Does the Indian government allow its citizens to purchase heroin, surface to air missiles, or slaves?

Isn’t that an infringement on liberty?

Liberty is not unrestricted.

  • But it allows the purchase of alcohol and cigarettes which are known to cause harm to human beings. Your examples involve the possible endangerment of other individuals when liberty is granted to individuals in respect of the items you cite. In the example that I cite, nobody else is affected. There has to be a reasonable interpretation of the word "liberty", and when to take it away. There must be scrutiny of precedent, or of what other countries do, or of potential harm caused to others, and so on while determining what to regulate. – user17144 Oct 29 '20 at 10:17
  • How can liberty be taken away arbitrarily based on certain prejudices? No country other than India has financial regulation of the kind I describe. – user17144 Oct 29 '20 at 10:17
  • Also, there are several other dangerous things that could be forbidden e.g swimming, driving, getting out of residence after 11 p.m at night, and so many others. Why are all of these things still allowed? – user17144 Oct 29 '20 at 10:28
  • Because the government decided to regulate this and not that - government has this power. – Dale M Oct 29 '20 at 10:55
  • OK. So this is arbitrary and the "liberty" is just a "parchment guarantee". Can this regulation be legally challenged in courts? Your previous answer did not make sense and I thought for a moment that you were probably just having a bad day, but your comment does make some sense. – user17144 Oct 29 '20 at 11:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.