The State of Gujarat enacted the Social Harmony Act, 2021, which included a provision under Section 5 prohibiting citizens from organizing public meetings without prior police approval. Another provision of the Act under

Doctrine of Severability According to Article 13(2) of the Constitution of India the State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by Part III and if such a law is made, it shall be void to the extent to which it curtails any such right. In State of Punjab v. Dalbir Singh AIR 2012 SC 1040 the Supreme Court has held that article 13 (2) clearly prohibits the making of any law by the State which takes away or abridges rights, conferred by part III of the Constitution. In the event of such a law being made the same shall be void to the extent of contravention. The doctrine has been applied invariably to cases where it has been found possible to separate the invalid part from the valid part of an Act. Article 13 only says that any law which is inconsistent with the fundamental rights is void "to the extent of inconsistency" and this has been interpreted to imply that it is not necessary to strike down the whole Act as invalid, if only a part is invalid. The other part can survive independently. In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, A.I.R. 1950 S.C. 27 , the Supreme Court ruled that where an Act was partly invalid, if the valid portion was severable from the rest, the valid portion would be maintained, provided that it was sufficient to carry out the purpose of the Act. Thus, according to Article 13, it is not the entire law which is affected by the provisions in Part III, but the law becomes invalid only to the extent to which it is inconsistent with the Fundamental Rights. So only that part of the law will be declared invalid which is inconsistent, and the rest of the law will stand. However, on this point a clarification has been made by the Courts that invalid part of the law shall be severed and declared invalid if really it is severable, i.e., if after separating the invalid part the valid part is capable of giving effect to the legislature's intent, then only it will survive, otherwise the Court shall declare the entire law as invalid. This is known as the Rule of Severability. In view of the above discussion, it can be said that the Section 5 of the Social Harmony Act, 2021, which imposes blanket restrictions on public meetings, can be said to be unconstitutional as violative of fundamental rights and can be severed, and the rest of the Act may continue to operate validly.