Imagine a scenario where a police officer makes an arrest without providing
notification of the cause and reason for the arrest. Moreover, you find yourself
deprived of the opportunity to defend your stance. This is the situation when one
lacks the rights granted under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Therefore, it
becomes crucial to understand the rights bestowed upon individuals by Article 21.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right that guarantees the
protection of life and personal liberty. This pivotal provision is enshrined in Part III
of the Indian Constitution, which delineates the fundamental rights of its citizens.
Article 21 is considered the backbone of individual rights, forming the bedrock for
the principles of justice and fairness in India.
Law and Life
The concept of life in Article 21 encompasses not only mere existence but also the
right to live with dignity. This includes the right to basic necessities such as food,
shelter, and healthcare. The Supreme Court of India has held that the right to life
under Article 21 encompasses the right to a clean environment, education, and
privacy. This holistic interpretation ensures that the right to life is meaningful and
comprehensive, extending beyond the physical aspect to encompass the overall
well-being of an individual.
Procedure Established by Law versus Due Process of Law
The term "procedure established by law" is mentioned in Article 21, meaning that
any deprivation of life or personal liberty must be in accordance with a legal
procedure set by the law. However, it is important to note that the Indian
Constitution does not expressly include the phrase "due process of law" as
mentioned in the American Constitution. The significance of this difference lies in
the interpretation of the two phrases. While "procedure established by law" focuses
solely on adherence to a legal procedure, "due process of law" involves fair, just,
and reasonable procedures that ensure a person's rights are protected. This
distinction creates an important contrast between the Indian and American legal
systems, with the latter placing a stronger emphasis on the protection of individual
rights.
Evolution of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
Position Before the Emergency in India
Before the imposition of the Emergency in 1975, there were landmark cases in
which the court interpreted this article under the given circumstances and
situations.
1. A.K.Gopalan vs. State of Madras 1950: Narrower/Literal Interpretation
The case of A.K. Gopalan marked a watershed moment in the interpretation of
Article 21. The Supreme Court, in a narrow interpretation, held that personal
liberty could be curtailed as long as it was done in accordance with the procedural
requirements of the law. This decision underscored the dominance of 'procedure
established by law' over 'due process' in India's legal landscape.
The court held that 'Personal Liberty' means nothing more than liberty of the
physical body, i.e., freedom from arrest and detention without the authority of law.
The court also held that 'Law' means 'State-made Laws' and does not include "Jus
Natural."
2. ADM Jabalpur vs. Shivkant Shukla: The Dark Era
During the tumultuous period of the Emergency in 1975, the Supreme Court's
judgment in ADM Jabalpur vs. Shivkant Shukla shook the foundations of
democracy. In a shocking departure from judicial principles, the Court ruled that
during emergencies, the State could suspend the right to life and personal liberty,
effectively rendering Article 21 toothless. This infamous judgment highlighted the
fragility of rights in times of crisis.
Position After the Emergency in India
In the case - Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India 1978, The Supreme Court overruled
the above-given judgments and widened the scope of Article 21 of our constitution.
The court held that the procedure contemplated under Article 21 could not be
unfair and unreasonable. It should be 'just, fair, and reasonable.' Similarly, 'Law'
under this article should embody the Principle of Natural Justice. The court
elaborated that the right to life is not merely confined to physical existence but
includes the 'Right to live with Human Dignity.'
Other Facets of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
1. Right to Privacy - Case: K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. v. Union of India
2. Adultery - Case: Joseph Shine v. Union of India
3. Right to Sleep - Case: Ramlila Maidan v. Home Secretary, UOI
4. Right to Free Legal Aid - Case: M.H. Hoskat v. State of Maharashtra
Conclusion
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution protects the fundamental rights of life and
personal liberty. The interpretation of this provision has undergone significant
changes over the years, resulting in a more expansive and protective approach. The
Supreme Court's decisions in cases like A.K. Gopalan, ADM Jabalpur vs. Shivkant
Shukla, and Maneka Gandhi have shaped the understanding of personal liberty and
the importance of adhering to natural justice principles. Through these
developments, Article 21 continues to serve as a vital safeguard for the rights and
freedoms of Indian citizens.
