Article 34 — Restriction on Fundamental Rights While Martial Law is in Force

Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Part, Parliament may by law indemnify any person in the service of the Union or of a State or any other person in respect of any act done by him in connection with the maintenance or restoration of order in any area where martial law was in force or validate any sentence passed, punishment inflicted, deprivation of property ordered or other act done under martial law in such area.

Source: Constitution of India, as published by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

Article 34 draws from a long British practice of parliamentary indemnity acts, under which Parliament would retrospectively legalise actions taken by the executive during civil disturbances or military operations that would otherwise have been unlawful. The framers included it on the pragmatic basis that when martial law (direct military administration replacing civilian law) is imposed in an area during extreme disorder, those maintaining order may need to take actions that technically violate normal legal and constitutional standards. Rather than leaving officials personally exposed to prosecution for such acts after order is restored, Parliament can pass an indemnity law covering the period. The article requires parliamentary action; the executive alone cannot grant such indemnity.

• Article 33
• Article 352
• Article 356

Last reviewed: 3 July 2026