By- Shaurya Chopra & Dhruv Pratap Singh

Horizontal application of fundamental rights has already been a consideration with some controversy in Indian constitutional law, traditionally circumscribed to the verticality of relationships between an individual and the State. However, the watershed judgment in Kaushal Kishor v State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. makes a departure from this previously entrenched concept and acknowledges that Articles 19 and 21 – freedom of speech, and right to life and personal liberty, respectively, can be enforced against private actors. This paper gives an account of the evolution through history of horizontal application of rights to the reasoning of the Court in Kaushal Kishor, and juxtaposes it with the dissenting voice that cautioned against judicial overreach. The ruling’s outer philosophies are interpreted throughout natural rights theory, legal positivism, and critical legal studies, mapping broader constitutional and societal implications of Kaushal Kishor. The ruling is then seen in the international dynamics looking at some evolving countries like South Africa, the USA, and the EU regarding horizontal rights stability. Finally, this paper explores the role of the Kaushal Kishor decision being a main leap in reworking the contours of constitutional accountability, where individual liberties and structural fidelity are in balance in times when private power seems to be taking precedence over public life.

Keywords: Horizontal Application, Natural Rights, Fundamental Rights, Judicial Interpretation, Constitutional Balance.