Emerging Trends in Climate Litigation and Constitutional Rights in India

Daily writing prompt
Tell us about your favorite pair of shoes, and where they’ve taken you.

Sajid A. Patel

Assistant Professor in Mercantile Law,

D.A.V. Velankar College of Commerce, Solapur

sajid123490@gmail.com

Abstract

In 2023, climate litigation in India underwent significant doctrinal and institutional development, with courts increasingly articulating environmental protection as a constitutional mandate. Although the formal recognition of climate rights under Article 21 occurred in 2024, the intellectual and jurisprudential foundation for this development was firmly established in 2023 through sustained judicial activism, the strategic use of public interest litigation, and rights-oriented interpretations of environmental law. This paper analyses how Indian courts in 2023 broadened constitutional jurisprudence to respond to the challenges of climate change, with particular emphasis on Article 21 (Right to Life), Article 14 (Right to Equality), and the principle of intergenerational equity. It examines significant judicial decisions, doctrinal innovations, and emerging adjudicatory trends that collectively positioned the Indian judiciary as a central actor in the governance of climate change.

Keywords: Climate Litigation, Constitutional Rights, Article 21, Environmental Justice, Sustainable Development, Public Interest Litigation, Intergenerational Equity, National Green Tribunal.

Introduction

In 2023, India’s vulnerability to the growing impacts of climate change became unmistakably clear and a matter of urgent national concern. The country witnessed record-breaking and prolonged heat waves across several regions, severely affecting public health, agricultural productivity, water availability, and overall economic stability. At the same time, monsoon patterns became increasingly erratic and unpredictable, disrupting traditional rainfall cycles on which millions of farmers depend. The situation was further aggravated by destructive floods in Assam and Himachal Pradesh, which caused large-scale displacement, infrastructure damage, and significant loss of life and property. These extreme climatic events collectively exposed the limitations and inadequacies of existing governmental policies and administrative preparedness, thereby intensifying public scrutiny of the State’s climate governance framework. As a result, affected individuals and civil society groups increasingly invoked constitutional rights to demand stronger, more accountable, and scientifically informed climate action.

Against this backdrop, the Indian judiciary long recognized for its expansive and purposive interpretation of fundamental rights emerged as a central forum for addressing climate-related grievances. Courts were approached not merely to resolve isolated environmental disputes but to examine broader constitutional obligations concerning climate protection and environmental sustainability. Although statutory instruments such as the Environment Protection Act and adjudicatory bodies like the National Green Tribunal provided procedural mechanisms for environmental redress, many litigants perceived these frameworks as insufficient to address the systemic and long-term challenges posed by climate change. Consequently, there was a growing shift toward constitutional litigation, with petitioners seeking explicit judicial recognition of climate rights as an integral component of fundamental rights, thereby reinforcing the role of constitutional law in shaping India’s climate governance.

Constitutional Mandate and Judicial Activism for Climate Protection

  1. Right to Life and Environmental Protection (Article 21)

Article 21 of the Constitution of India says that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. Judicial interpretation has significantly expanded the meaning of “life” to include the right to live with dignity, health, and a clean and safe environment. In many cases like M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case) ((1987) 1 SCC 395), Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar ((1991) 1 SCC 598), Indian Council for Enviro Legal Action v. Union of India ((1996) 3 SCC 212), M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath ((1997) 1 SCC 388), Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India ((1996) 5 SCC 647), A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu ((1999) 2 SCC 718), Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India ((2019) 15 SCC 401), In Re: Noise Pollution:-Implementation of the Laws for Restricting Use of Loudspeakers ((2022) SCC On Line SC 150) the Supreme Court of India has held that right to pollution free environment is a  part of Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution and so any type of pollution affecting human life is violative of fundamental Right to Life under Article 21.

Recently in M.K. Ranjitsinh & Others v. Union of India & Others (2024) Writ Petition (Civil) No. 838 of 2019 the Supreme Court held that Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India includes the right to live in a healthy environment and the protection of biodiversity. In this case a Writ Petition was filed to protect the Great Indian Bustard and Lesser Florican, two critically endangered bird species in India. For protection of climate protection of biodiversity is necessary and the same has been emphasised by the Court.

ii) Equality and Climate Vulnerability (Article 14)

Article 14 guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws. Climate change disproportionately affects vulnerable populations, including rural communities, economically weaker sections, indigenous and forest-dwelling groups and Women and children.

Rural populations mainly depend on agriculture and natural resources. Climate change including erratic rainfall, droughts and floods disproportionately affects their livelihoods, leading to inequality in access to resources and justice which is violative of their fundamental right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution. In M.K. Ranjitsinh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. the Supreme Court recognized the right to be free from adverse effects of climate change as part of Articles 21 and 14. This ruling emphasized that equality requires protecting vulnerable groups like rural farmers from disproportionate climate burdens. Similarly poor households face higher exposure to climate risks like heat waves, heavy rainfall, floods etc.  due to inadequate housing, lack of healthcare, and limited adaptive capacity as compared to other people belonging to higher economic strata. Indigenous communities including tribal who are dependent on forest face displacement, biodiversity loss, and erosion of cultural rights due to deforestation and climate change. Article 14 requires equal protection of their rights, ensuring they are not side lined in climate governance. Women often suffer from climate induced resource scarcity of water and food security while children are more vulnerable to health impacts due to climate changes. In many cases including Rajnathsinh’s case the Supreme Court of India has emphasised that equality under Article 14 cannot be realized without addressing climate impacts, implicitly covering women and children.

iii)Directive Principles of State Policy

Part IV of Indian Constitution comprising of Articles 36 to 51 provides for Directive Principles of State Policy which are directives to the Government to be followed while making laws and policies for ensuring welfare of Indian citizens. Although Directive Principles are non-justiciable they provide crucial constitutional guidance in environmental matters. Article 48-A directs the State to protect and improve the environment and safeguard forests and wildlife. Indian courts have repeatedly used this provision to interpret fundamental rights in an environmentally progressive manner. Article 39(b) and (c) emphasise equitable distribution of resources and prevention of concentration of wealth. Climate governance, especially regarding natural resources, aligns with these principles. In many cases like M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case) ((1987) 1 SCC 395), M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case) ((1988) 1 SCC 471), T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India ((1997) 2 SCC 267) and Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (AIR 2000 SC 3751) the Indian Judiciary used the provisions of Directive Principles of State Policy for protection and preservation of natural environment.

Fundamental Duty to protect environment

Article 51 A (g) of Indian Constitution imposes a duty upon every Indian citizen to protect and improve the natural environment. Even though fundamental duties are not directly enforceable, in many Indian judiciary has used them to justify restrictions on environmentally harmful activities, reinforce the legitimacy of environmental regulations and emphasise collective responsibility in climate governance. Thus in Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India ((1996) 5 SCC 647) the Supreme Court invoked Article 51A (g) along with Article 48A to emphasize citizens’ duty in environmental protection and evolved Precautionary Principle, which requires preventive action in cases of environmental risk, even in the absence of complete scientific certainty and Polluter Pays principle which imposes obligation upon the person who is responsible for pollution to bear the costs of remediation. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India popularly known as Taj Trapezium Case ((1997) 2 SCC 353) the Supreme Court by using Article 51 A (g) justified restrictions on industries polluting near the Taj Mahal. In Almitra Patel v. Union of India ((2000) 2 SCC 679) the Supreme Court has stated that it is a fundamental duty of every citizen to not to not litter and to cooperate with municipal authorities. In T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India ((1997) 2 SCC 267) the Supreme Court held that it is the fundamental duty of every citizen to protect the forests.

Role of Public Interest Litigation

            Public spirited persons and N.G.Os. filed many Public Interest Litigations for protection of environment on behalf of affected communities. The rule of Locus Standi has been relaxed by the Supreme Court to broaden the access to justice for marginalized groups impacted by environmental degradation and pollution. Indian judiciary has used the fundamental rights, directive principles of state policy, fundamental duties in the Constitution to allow the Public Interest Litigations for protection of environment and those who are affected by environmental pollution and degradation.

Thus in Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1985 SC 652) the Supreme Court ordered closure of limestone quarries in Mussoorie to prevent ecological damage.  In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case) (AIR 1987 SC 1086) expanded Article 21 to include environmental safety. In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Ganga Pollution Case) ((1988) 1 SCC 471) by allowing a Public Interest Litigation Court directed closure of polluting tanneries. In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India ((2000) 10 SCC 664) Supreme Court balanced development with environmental concerns. In many Public Interest Litigations filed in Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court it has been reiterated that Right to Life under Article 21 includes the right to clean air. The Courts have invoked Article 48 which is a Directive Principle and Article 51 A (g) which is Fundamental Duty to emphasise collective responsibility to protect the environment. In Bombay High Court and Madras High Court Public Interest Litigations were filed for municipal waste management. Courts directed civic bodies to comply with Solid Waste Management Rules, citing citizen’s duty under Article 51A (g). In 2023 in continuation of Writ Petition filed in 1995 in T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India and Others ((1997) 2 SCC 267) the Supreme Court by monitoring compliance of forest conservation norm issued several directions for conservation of forests and illegalizing deforestation and encroachment in forests and enforced duty of state under Article 48 of Constitution. In M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024 SCC On Line SC 570) upon a Public Interest Litigation Supreme Court held that right to be free from adverse effects of climate change is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Contemporary Developments in Climate Litigation Jurisprudence

            Contemporary development of climate litigation jurisprudence can be explained with following points

            i)Shift from Environmental Protection to Climate Accountability

Earlier in n the 1980s and 1990s, Indian courts primarily dealt with pollution control, deforestation, and industrial hazards which is evident from cases in which writ petitions were filed by public spirited persons like M.C. Mehta and other N.G.O.s. Earlier the focus of Indian judiciary was on preventing harm to environment causing by air, water, noise pollution and enforcing statutory compliance under laws like the Water Act, Air Act, and Forest Conservation Act. In cases in mid 90s Supreme Court of India has evolved certain new principles like Polluter Pays Principle, Precautionary Principle etc. Since 2019, Indian courts have increasingly addressed climate change impacts directly, moving beyond general environmental protection. In Hanuman Laxman Aroskar v. Union of India (2019) the court scrutinized environmental clearances for large projects, stressing climate‑sensitive decision‑making. Similarly in M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India the Supreme Court protected endangered species like the Great Indian Bustard, linking biodiversity loss to climate change and intergenerational equity.

New era has witnessed active role of youth in protection of environment and environmental resources which is evident from a writ petition filed by Ridhima Pandey which was cited as Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India, Civil Appeal No. 388 of 2021, pending before the Supreme Court of India. In this case petitioner Ridhima Pandey emphasised on failure of Government of India to take adequate steps to combat climate change despite obligations of Government under the Environment Protection Act, 1986, the Forest Conservation Act, 1980, and international commitments like the Paris Agreement.

ii) Fundamental Rights-Based Framing of Climate Harm

The cases like Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991) and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak, 1987) in which it was held that pollution‑free air and water are essential for Right to Life under Article 21 formed basis for linking environmental harm with constitutional rights. Later in N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India (1997) Court held that forest conservation and ecological balance are integral to Article 21. Recent petitions, such as Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India (Civil Appeal No. 388 of 2021), shows that failure of State to protect climate violates fundamental rights. Apart from only environmental issue harm to climate and environment has now become a matter involving violation of fundamental rights.

iii) Doctrinal Innovations by Judiciary:-

Indian judiciary especially the Supreme Court has been inventing new doctrines in the litigations for environmental protection. Absolute Liability principle which makes an enterprise engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities fully liable for any harm caused without any exception or defence was evolved by Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak, AIR 1987 SC 1086). Precautionary Principle which says that when there is a risk of serious or irreversible environmental harm, the lack of complete scientific certainty cannot be used as a reason to delay preventive measures and Polluter Pays principle which says that the party responsible for causing pollution must bear the costs of managing and remedying the damagecaused to the environment were evolved by Supreme Court in Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India ((1996) 5 SCC 647). In M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Nath & Others, ((1997) 1 SCC 388) the Supreme Court evolved the doctrine of Public Trust doctrine which says that certain natural resources like rivers, forests, and coastal are preserved for public use, and the State acts as a trustee of these resources and so even State cannot transfer or exploit such resources for private gain, as they belong to the people collectively. In recent cases involving climate litigation like M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024) and Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India (2021) the principle of Climate Accountability and Climate Justice has been evolved by Supreme Court for protection of environment.

iv)Integration of International Climate Commitments

In many climate litigations Supreme Court has applied and integrated international norms and commitments for protection of environment. Thus in accordance with international convention of Rio Declaration (1992) in Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v. Union of India ((1996) 5 SCC 647) Supreme Court has evolved Precautionary Principle and Polluter Pays Principle. In Ridhima Pandey v. Union of India the petitioner emphasised on Paris Agreement (2015) and contended that failure to meet emission reduction targets and adaptation measures violates both international commitments and fundamental rights domestically.

Conclusion

Indian climate litigation has moved beyond traditional environmental protection to embrace constitutional climate accountability. By interpreting Article 21 to include the right to a healthy environment and extending Article 14 to address climate vulnerability, the judiciary has firmly placed climate justice within the constitutional framework. The use of Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties highlights the shared responsibility of both the State and citizens in safeguarding ecological integrity. Public Interest Litigations have been crucial in widening access to climate justice, ensuring that marginalized communities are represented in constitutional adjudication. Judicial innovations such as the Precautionary Principle, Polluter Pays Principle, and Public Trust Doctrine have now evolved into climate-specific doctrines, while references to international commitments like the Paris Agreement show India’s engagement with global climate governance. Together, these developments establish the judiciary not only as a forum for environmental disputes but as a constitutional guardian of intergenerational equity and climate justice. Recognizing climate rights as fundamental rights marks a turning point in India’s constitutional journey, affirming that the struggle against climate change is inseparable from the protection of human dignity, equality, and life itself.

References

  1. Leelakrishnan, Environmental Law in India (LexisNexis, 2021).
    K.C. Agrawal, Environmental Pollution and Law (Agro Botanical Publishers, 1995).
    Shibani Ghosh, Climate Change and the Law in India: Emerging Trends and Challenges
  2. (Centre for Policy Research, 2023).
    Sairam Bhat, Law of Environmental Protection in India (Eastern Book Company, 2012).
  3. Archana Ashok Khandwe, Climate Change Litigation in India: Rising Judicial Activism Post–M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India (2024), Ves College of Law Journal (2024).
  4. Aakash Malik, Courts and Climate: How Judicial Interpretation Shapes Environmental Law in India, International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR), Vol. 11, Issue 4 (Oct. 2024).
  5. Shibani Ghosh, Litigating Climate Change in India: Emerging Trends and Challenges, NUJS Law Review (2023).
  6. Lavanya Rajamani, The Increasing Role of Courts in Climate Governance: Lessons from India, Journal of Environmental Law (2022).
  7. Mamta Devi, Constitutional Law and Climate Change in India: Is There a Right to a Sustainable Environment?, LHP College of Law Journal (2024).
  8. Relevant Case Laws

Subversive Entrepreneurship: Navigating Capitalism and Conscience in Aravind Adiga’s The White Tiger

Daily writing prompt
In what ways does hard work make you feel fulfilled?

Anil Vandeo Andel[1]

Abstract

The paper delves into the theme of subversive entrepreneurship in Aravind Adiga’s The White Tiger, highlighting the intricate relationship between capitalism and moral conscience through the eyes of Balram Halwai. Balram’s transformation from a lowly servant in rural India to a thriving entrepreneur in Bangalore offers a sharp critique of a capitalist system that often prioritizes financial ambition over ethical values. The idea of subversive entrepreneurship is explored as a practice where individuals push against traditional moral boundaries in their pursuit of success. Balram’s journey is marked by difficult choices—most notably, his morally questionable actions, including murder—that expose the darker realities of capitalism, where the fight for survival often demands ethical sacrifices. Adiga presents capitalism as a double-edged sword: it provides pathways for upward mobility but also creates an environment filled with moral ambiguity. Through Balram’s internal struggles and justifications, we see the conflict between ambition and conscience, prompting important reflections on the true costs of economic freedom. The paper argues that The White Tiger challenges readers to rethink the ethical implications of entrepreneurship, questioning the idea that success is always virtuous while illuminating the sacrifices that often accompany it. Balram’s story not only critiques the nature of personal ambition but also serves as a poignant commentary on the moral emptiness that can arise from an unrelenting quest for economic gain in today’s competitive landscape.

Keywords: Subversive entrepreneurship, capitalism, moral conscience, social mobility, justification of actions, moral compromise.

Introduction

Aravind Adiga’s The White Tiger offers a deeply moving look at the complexities of modern India, intertwining themes of ambition, morality, and the harsh realities of capitalism. Central to this narrative is Balram Halwai, a man born into poverty ridden Darkness who daringly transforms his life through what can only be described as subversive entrepreneurship. His journey becomes a powerful lens through which it can be explored the relationship between economic systems and ethical considerations in a rapidly evolving society. When it is thought of entrepreneurship, we often envision innovation, risk-taking, and ethical business practices. Adiga challenges this conventional view, suggesting that entrepreneurship can also be a double-edged sword. Balram’s transformation from a servant in rural India to a successful entrepreneur in Bangalore illustrates the conflicting pressures within a capitalist framework, where ambition can require painful moral compromises. His path isn’t just about achieving wealth; it forces to question the very nature of conscience and ethics. In a society where wealth equates to power, Balram’s story reveals an often-overlooked truth.  The pursuit of success can lead people to forsake their moral principles. He captures this stark reality when he observes that the best way to keep the poor man down is to keep him from the money. This insight highlights the systemic barriers that maintain inequality and underscores Balram’s determination to escape his circumstances. Yet, this journey is fraught with ethical dilemmas, prompting him to question what it truly means to be free.

Balram’s experience serves as a broader critique of neoliberal capitalism, where personal ambition often collides with societal norms and ethical standards. As he navigates the perilous waters of entrepreneurship, his choices reflect a conscious departure from traditional morality. His drastic actions, including murder, become a radical assertion of agency in a world that often sidelines the poor and marginalized. In this light, The White Tiger invites to confront uncomfortable truths about the moral costs associated with economic ambition. It raises vital questions firstly, whether it truly means to succeed in a system that rewards ruthlessness and secondly at what point the pursuit of personal gain overshadows one’s responsibilities to others? Through Balram’s transformation, the novel encourages to rethink one’s understanding of entrepreneurship—not merely as a virtuous endeavour, but as a complex interplay of ambition, ethics, and survival. The paper will delve into these themes, analysing how Balram Halwai embodies subversive entrepreneurship and the implications of his actions within the broader socio-economic landscape of India. By examining the connection between capitalism and conscience in The White Tiger, it can gain valuable insights into the moral challenges faced by individuals navigating the intricate dance of ambition in an increasingly competitive world.

In The White Tiger, Aravind Adiga offers a rich and layered perspective on entrepreneurship that goes beyond the typical definitions it often encounters. Subversive entrepreneurship, as it is portrayed, involves challenging established norms and ethical boundaries in the relentless pursuit of success. This form of entrepreneurship doesn’t just seek profit; it questions and often undermines existing social and economic structures. Through the character of Balram Halwai, Adiga observes the moral compromises that frequently accompany the desire for upward mobility in a capitalist society.

Subversive entrepreneurship sets itself apart from traditional entrepreneurship, which typically focuses on innovation and business growth. Instead, it embodies a conscious choice to confront the status quo, often stepping outside recognized ethical frameworks. This can take various forms, including unethical business practices, exploitation of labour, or even criminal actions—each of which may be justified as necessary for survival or success. Jennifer Klein (2015, p. 850) asserts, “Subversive entrepreneurship distinguishes itself by prioritizing social change and challenging existing power structures, rather than merely focusing on innovation and market growth”. Balram’s journey perfectly illustrates this concept. Born into a caste of servants and mired in poverty driven Darkness, he becomes acutely aware of the barriers to success in India. Balram reflects, “The greatest thing to come out of this country in the ten thousand years of its history is the Rooster Coop” (Adiga, 2017, p.173). This statement captures the struggle of the underprivileged, whose dreams are often stifled by societal constraints. Balram’s transformation from a servant to a successful entrepreneur isn’t just about accumulating wealth; it’s a rebellion against a system designed to keep him in his place. This system is predominant from the old ages which is difficult to break for the people of Darkness.

Capitalism has its dark side which is usually hidden from the masses. The rebellion against the capitalism is the product of capitalism itself. Arundhati Roy (2014, pp. 78) hints that the poverty created by capitalism often drives people to embrace illegal activities as a form of resistance against an oppressive economic order. In order to emphasis the fact of dark side of capitalism, Michael Parenti (2004) proposes that the criminalization of the poor in a capitalist system can be seen as a reaction to their inability to thrive under conditions that favour wealth accumulation for the few. Adiga doesn’t shy away from exploring the darker aspects of capitalism, showing how the quest for profit can lead individuals to make morally questionable choices. Balram’s journey is riddled with ethical dilemmas, culminating in the murder of his employer—a desperate act he rationalizes as a means of liberation.

Why not? Am I not a part of all that is changing this country? Haven’t I succeeded in the struggle that every poor man here should be making—the struggle not to take the lashes your father took, not to end up in a mound of indistinguishable bodies that will rot in the black mud of Mother Ganga? True. (Adiga, 2017, p. 318)

This moment marks a significant turning point, emphasizing how the hunger for economic freedom can push someone to extreme actions. Supportive analysis from scholars reinforces this view of Balram’s choices. For instance, Amartya Sen (1999, p. 95) discusses the moral implications of ambition and success within economic systems, noting how ethical considerations can often be overshadowed by personal ambition. Balram’s justifications for his actions shed light on the complexities of subversive entrepreneurship. He sees his criminal acts as necessary steps toward his ultimate goal, encapsulating the belief that success is worth any price. This mindset is a reflection of the survival theme prevalent in a system that often marginalizes the poor. Balram states, “You see, I’m always a man who sees “tomorrow” when others see “today” (Adiga, 2017, p. 319). The statement underscores his pragmatic approach to entrepreneurship, where financial success becomes paramount, regardless of the ethical implications.

Balram’s rationalizations for his actions reveal his effort to reconcile his ambitions with his sense of self. He wrestles with what it means to be a “good” person in a world that seems to reward the opposite. He acknowledges himself as, “just a servant” (Adiga, 2017, p. 129), recognizing the societal expectations that constrain him. This realization complicates his conscience, as he feels justified in his actions by the oppressive structures around him. Zygmunt Bauman (2007, p. 81) explores the moral challenges of contemporary society, particularly how individuals navigate ethical compromises in a rapidly changing economic landscape. The White Tiger exposes the grim realities of a society where ethics are sacrificed on the altar of success emphasizing the tragic consequences of Balram’s choices. Scholars have explored the implications of these rationalizations within the context of neoliberal capitalism. Robert Putnam (2000) discusses how social capital and economic disparity can influence moral considerations, noting that often, the means become secondary to the ends. The critique highlights how societal pressures can warp ethical considerations, compelling individuals like Balram to adopt subversive strategies to achieve their dreams.

Balram’s decision to commit murder—a choice he rationalizes as necessary for liberation—underscores the complexities of conscience within the context of subversive entrepreneurship. He sees his crime as a necessary evil, stating, ‘‘and once the master of the Honda City becomes corrupted, how can the driver stay innocent?’’ (Adiga, 2017, p. 197). This mindset reveals how the relentless pursuit of economic gain can lead individuals to justify unethical behaviour. Ananya Roy in Poverty Capital (2010, p. 102-103) hints that a world where the moral compass is often overshadowed by the allure of wealth, even the most well-meaning individuals can be corrupted by the seductive power of capitalism. It suggests that Balram’s actions reflect a broader societal trend where ethical considerations take a backseat to financial success. Balram rationalises his deed as the right step to become free from the servitude: ‘‘even if they throw me in jail and have all the other prisoners dip their beaks into me—even if they make me walk the wooden stairs to the hangman’s noose—I’ll never say I made a mistake that night in Delhi when I slit my master’s throat’’ (Adiga, 2017, p. 320). This perspective highlights how capitalism can create a moral vacuum, pushing individuals to navigate their conscience in an environment that frequently rewards greed over integrity.

Despite the ethical compromises he makes, Balram’s journey is also one of seeking agency and empowerment. By breaking free from the confines of his caste and socioeconomic status, he represents the idea that entrepreneurship can be a pathway to social mobility. However, this empowerment comes at a significant moral cost, raising critical questions about the true nature of freedom within a capitalist society. Balram realises that he has to break the shackles of servitude which is akin that of the Rooster Coop. He knows that if he fails to do so, he would be the part of 99.9 percent caught in the Rooster Coop. “It’s because 99.9 percent of us are caught in the Rooster Coop just like those poor guys in the poultry market” (Adiga, 2017, p. 175). In analysing Balram’s choices, it becomes clear that his entrepreneurial spirit serves both as a means of survival and a form of rebellion against oppressive structures. David Harvey (2005, p. 68) discusses how individual success in a neoliberal context often involves a rejection of ethical norms. Balram’s success is deeply intertwined with a rejection of ethical norms, prompting readers to consider the consequences of such subversive paths. Moreover, the atmosphere around Balram compels him to break the shackles of servitude. The negligence on the part of his master towards him is the prime reason to negate his moral conscious. Earlier, he has been careful to Ashok but soon he realises capitalist mentality of masters. He begins to take pride in robbing his master. ‘‘The strangest thing was that each time I looked at the cash I had made by cheating him, instead of guilt, what did I feel? Rage. The more I stole from him, the more I realized how much he had stolen from me’’ (Adiga, 2017, p. 231). This very point is the beginning of receding his moral conscious towards his master. He laments: “A handful of men in this country have trained the remaining 99.9 percent—as strong, as talented, as intelligent in every way—to exist in perpetual servitude; a servitude so strong that you can put the key of his emancipation in a man’s hands and he will throw it back at you with a curse”. (Adiga, 2017, p. 175-76)

His experience illustrates the tension between personal ambition and social responsibility. Ultimately, Balram asserts his identity through subversive means, though this comes at a considerable moral cost. He declares, “But your heart has become even blacker than that, Munna” (Adiga, 2017, p. 265), showcasing the inner conflict between his aspirations and the guilt that accompanies his actions. Balram’s ascent is fraught with profound internal conflict, especially as he confronts the moral weight of his decisions. At first, he embodies a strong sense of right and wrong, rooted in the values instilled in him during his upbringing. He reflects, “I could gloat that I am not just any murderer, but one who killed his own employer (who is a kind of second father)” (Adiga, 2017, p. 45). However, as he delves deeper into the corrupt world of wealth and power, he increasingly finds himself at odds with these values. He candidly admits that he is the murderer of his master, ‘‘I slit Mr. Ashok’s throat’’ (Adiga, 2017, p. 42), acknowledging the drastic measures he took to escape his class constraints. This admission encapsulates Balram’s struggle with his conscience as he weighs his yearning for freedom against the ethical fallout of his actions. His journey serves as a broader commentary on how economic pressures can warp one’s moral compass. As he reflects, “Like all good Bangalore stories, mine begins far away from Bangalore. You see, I am in the Light now, but I was born and raised in Darkness” (Adiga, 2017, p. 14). It becomes evident that his pursuit of success comes at a significant loss of innocence.

Balram becomes the successful entrepreneur in Bangalore under the identity of Ashok Sharma. He is at the acme of his success in terms of wealth and affluence but he cannot enjoy devoid of his family members. He repents that he, “also contributed to the probable death of all his family members. A virtual mass murderer” (Adiga, 2017, p. 45). The sense of guilt is pricking him every now and then. He is man of dark soul now which is irreversible. “True, there was the matter of murder—which is a wrong thing to do, no question about it. It has darkened my soul. All the skin-whitening creams sold in the markets of India won’t clean my hands again” (Adiga, 2017, p. 318). This duality reflects a broader commentary on the nature of conscience in a capitalist society. Balram’s transformation challenges the notion that success must be achieved through ethical means, encouraging readers to ponder the implications of such choices. As Vivek Chibber in Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital (2013) suggests that in a world where the pursuit of wealth dominates, the individual’s moral integrity often becomes collateral damage.

Aravind Adiga’s The White Tiger offers a gripping look at the complex relationship between capitalism and conscience, as seen through the eyes of Balram Halwai. His journey from a humble servant to a thriving entrepreneur illustrates the often-murky waters of subversive entrepreneurship, where the drive for success can come at a steep ethical price. As Balram navigates this challenging terrain, he faces the stark realities of a society that frequently prioritizes economic gain over moral values, pushing him to make choices that defy conventional ethics. The novel challenges readers to confront uncomfortable truths about the sacrifices that ambition demands in a world that seems to reward those who are willing to be ruthless. Balram’s most shocking act—killing his employer—marks a turning point in his life, revealing how his yearning for freedom can eclipse his sense of right and wrong. This moment not only highlights the moral compromises that often accompany the pursuit of wealth but also raises pressing questions like whether it truly means to be successful in a system that often punishes integrity and for the pursuit of personal gains overshadow ethical responsibility.

Adiga paints capitalism as a double-edged sword, offering opportunities while simultaneously creating moral dilemmas. Balram’s internal struggles reflect the broader conflict many people face in their own lives, where the seductive promise of wealth can blur the lines of conscience. His attempts to justify his actions mirror societal values that often prioritize profit over principle, urging us to think critically about the structures that shape our choices. In exploring Balram’s story, The White Tiger invites us to reconsider what we define as success and the moral implications that come with it in today’s capitalist landscape. It challenges the idea that entrepreneurship is inherently virtuous, revealing a reality where the quest for economic freedom often entails significant moral costs. Adiga’s narrative serves as a poignant reminder that in our relentless chase for ambition, our conscience can easily be sidelined, prompting us to reflect on the ethical dimensions of our pursuits and their broader societal impacts. Ultimately, The White Tiger is more than just a tale of personal triumph; it’s a powerful commentary on the moral complexities we face in an increasingly competitive world.

References:

Adiga, Aravind. (2017). The White Tiger. Noida: HarperCollins Publishers India.

Bauman, Zygmunt. (2007). Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Chibber, Vivek. (2013). Postcolonial Theory and the Specter of Capital. London: Verso Books.

Harvey, David. (2005). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Klein, Jennifer. (2015). The Emergence of Subversive Entrepreneurship: A New Approach to the Concept of the Entrepreneur. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(4), 845-860.

Parenti, Michael. (2004). Against Empire. San Francisco: City Lights Books.

Putnam, Robert D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Roy, Ananya. (2010). Poverty Capital: Microfinance and the Making of Development. New York: Routledge.

Roy, Arundhati. (2014). Capitalism: A Ghost Story. Chicago: Haymarket Books.

Sen, Amartya. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.


[1] Lecturer in English, Government Polytechnic Gondia, Maharashtra https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9908-8000