Audi alteram partem

No person should be condemned or penalised without being given a fair chance to present their side. It is one of the two rules of natural justice. The other is that no one should be a judge in their own cause.

1. Notice of the case or charge against the person.
2. A fair opportunity to reply and to place material before the authority.
3. A decision made after considering that reply.

• Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works (1863), England: the Board demolished a house built without giving notice to the owner. Held: the Board acted wrongly because the owner had not been heard first.
• A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969), Supreme Court: the Court held that natural justice applies to administrative decisions too, not only to judicial ones.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), Supreme Court: the passport was impounded without a hearing. The Court read natural justice into the procedure required by Article 21.

Not a statute. The rule is read into Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India through the case law above.

• A statute may exclude the right to be heard, either expressly or by necessary implication.
• Urgent cases may need immediate action, with a hearing given afterwards.
• A hearing is not needed where it would be impractical or serve no purpose.

Indian law follows the English origin of the rule and takes it further. Through Maneka Gandhi it has constitutional force under Article 21.

Asked as "explain the principles of natural justice". State both rules, then the exceptions.

"Audi" sounds like "audio": listen to the other party before deciding.

Hear the affected person before deciding against them.