A cursory reference to duties, as well as a reference to dharma, which the individual owes to society was also brought up by Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar in the context of zamindari and land reforms.92 Dharma was said to be the law of social wellbeing and, along with duty, formed the basis of India’s social framework.93 He urged that capitalism was a Western and alien ideal and thus property relations should be organised to serve a social purpose, or yagna, as found in Gandhian teachings. The dharmic idea of duty was not embraced by the Assembly and encoded in the Constitution of India 1950. Besides a superficial reference to dharma and duty in the context of Hindi being designated as the national language, this view found no further support.94 One may have anticipated a vigorous debate between this dharmic view of duty and Dr Ambedkar’s critical response to attempts to import such views into the Constitution. However, on the topic of duties, Ambedkar’s views are merely to affirm that the obligation regarding (non-)accepting of titles95 may be construed as a condition or duty of continued citizenship in India.96 This part of the paper reviews the references to fundamental duties in the Constitutional Assembly Debates in 1948 and 1949.97 The discussion above confirms that fundamental duties as envisaged in Article 51A of the Constitution of India 1950 were neither anticipated nor extensively considered in the Debates. The several references to duties above may be organised into two analytical categories: first, the source of duties and secondly, the nature of duties. These two concerns are closely related and intertwined and considered briefly below. Members, who expressed the need for duties, relied on diverse justifications for such duties. Some saw duties essentially as logical correlates to the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution. Hence, if there are rights, there are duties not merely on the state but also on fellow citizens. This horizontal application of rights gave rise 9.138.62, 12 September 1949 https://www.constitutionofindia.net/debates/12-aug-1949/ (accessed 9 October 2023). 93 9.138.62, 12 September 1949 https://www.constitutionofindia.net/debates/12-aug-1949/ (accessed 9 October 2023). 94 14 September 1949 https://www.constitutionofindia.net/debates/14-sep-1949/ (accessed 9 October 2023). 95 30 November 1948 https://www.constitutionofindia.net/debates/30-nov-1948/ (accessed 9 October 2023). 96 7.63.269, 30 November 1948 https://www.constitutionofindia.net/debates/30-nov-1948/ (accessed 9 October 2023). 97 See also, another duty that was mooted but summarily rejected due to changing circumstances of its proposal was the duty to bear arms for the state. 7.65.169, 2 and 3 December 1948 https://www. constitutionofindia.net/debates/02-dec-1948/ (accessed 9 October 2023). There are several mentions with respect to the duty of the majority towards the minority in securing their sacred rights, in the context of societal equality and reservations (8 November 1948, 23 November 1948, 9 December 1948, 26 May 1949, 24 August 1949). A few mentions have been to isolated and specific duties, without much delving into the philosophical underpinnings of these duties, such as the duty to respect the flag (22 July 1947), the sacred duty of women towards caring for their children and fostering their families (22 November 1948), and the duty to vote (21 November 1949). 92 36 Journal of the National Human Rights Commission, Vol. 22, 2023