Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty. Discuss how the judiciary has expanded the scope of Article 21 through various landmark judgments. How has this expansion impacted the rights of individuals in India? Illustrate your answer with relevant case laws.
Sreyoshi Roy ChowdhuryBegginer
Article 21 embodies a constitutional value of supreme importance in a democratic society” as quoted by PN Bhagwati. Judiciary through judgments in various fields such as :-
Environment
1. MC Mehta vs Union of India Right to healthy clean environment
2. Subhash Kumar vs state of Bihar Right to pollution free air and water
Personal liberty
1. Navtej Singh vs Union of India Right to choose one’s sexual orientation
2. Menaka Gandhi vs UoI Right to life and live with human dignity
3. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India Right to privacy
Social issues
1. Visakhapatnam vs State of Rajasthan right against sexual harassment at the workplace
2. Mohini Jain vs State of Karnataka Right to education
These significant cases restricted the arbitrary actions taken by government at times and guided them with new duties such as duty to protect and improve environment, duty to provide medical facilities, allow free movement of citizen etc. Article 21, thus, enables individual to live a life which is meaningful and worth living. Thus, Indian Judiciary is a progressive judiciary as it included various aspects of human life which are overlooked, thereby, strengthening the notion of democracy.
Article 21 of Constitution of India protects the fundamental right to life and personal liberty. The scope of this article has been expanded by the judiciary in various judgements. One of the landmark case for this article is – Maneka Gandhi v. UOI. In this case the passport of Maneka Gandhi was seized by the authorities under the Passport Act. A lawsuit followed. A 7 judge bench of Supreme Court held that a procedure under article 21 cannot be arbitrary or unreasonable. It paved a path to make India a Welfare State. It said that Right to life and personal liberty also included the right to travel abroad. It also established a relationship between Article 14 , 19 and 21; the holy trinity of the Indian Constitution. It also paved way to expand the rights of individuals against the state , instead of limiting or contracting them.
Though, Directive principles are not enforceable in any court of India, but the fundamental rights are safeguarded indirectly. Our constitutional makers have put constitutional remedies in place ,namely habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari.Any action by legislative or executive organ , which violates the fundamental rights of any Indian citizen or Foreigner (in few cases) will be nullified as void by only under the authority of Supreme Court or any High Court of India. But it is important to understand that article 21 and Artcle 19 are protected against any action of state (defined in article 12 of Indian Constitution) but not against individual actions which violates their fundamental right mentioned in article 21 and 19 (might have legal remedy but not constitutional remedy). Article 21 is not intended to limit power of legislature but to limit the illegal actions of executives.
There are many cases under which Article 21 have been evoked and brought historical and policy changes in India for example right to life , many aspects like Right to Clean water and air, Right to Education etc basically think the elements of life which are integral to leading a life with dignity.
One interesting case is Right against Solitary Confinement under Artcile 21 , case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Administration . , granted imprisonment but held under solitary confinement for 8 years which is clear violation of Artcile 21.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a gamut of rights as discovered by the Indian Judiciary over time. Known as the “heart or bedrock” of our Indian Constitution, Article 21 holds a great level of importance as it unfolds. Described as “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law” this article is widely interpreted by the judiciary to make a protective blanket for every person against all the odds of society.
Starting from the A.K. Gopalan Case 1950, which identifies personal liberty as merely “bodily” freedom, to the landmark Maneka Gandhi Case, which makes the right to live with dignity inclusive of A21. It stated that the P.E.B.L. must be fair and not arbitrary.
In The Olga Tellis v.s. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1986), the court included the Right to Livelihood under the ambit of A21, protecting pavement dwellers from eviction without alternative accommodation.
Making Right to Privacy a part of A21, through Justice R.S. Puttaswamy v.s. U.O.I 2017, the S.C. expanded the purview of A21. In the series of expansions, the Right To Education was entitled as an F.R. under A21(a) by the 86th C.A.A. through the landmark judgment in Miss Mohini Jain v.s. State Of Karnataka (1992).
This series of interpretations is a never-ending process, guaranteeing every person a just and dignified life.