A BOOK REVIEW OF
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OF INDIA
BY- RAUNAK
VIKRAMAJIT SINGH SANATAN DHARMA COLLEGE, NAWABGANJ KANPUR
(Author: Dr. J.N. Pandey, Central Law Agency, Allahabad First Publish 1969, ISBN: 978-81-945686-4-3)
Article 21- Right to Life and Personal Liberty
Synopsis:
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right that safeguards the most essential and inherent human rights – the right to life and personal liberty. Enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, this article plays a pivotal role in upholding the principles of justice, liberty, and equality. The interpretation and evolution of Article 21 have had a profound impact on the Indian legal landscape, as it continues to be a cornerstone for protecting the rights of citizens. This article explores the historical context, interpretation, and significant judgments associated with Article 21, emphasizing its pivotal role in shaping the legal framework of India.
The origin of Article 21 can be traced back to the draft Constitution prepared by the Constituent Assembly of India. B.R. Rajam, a prominent member of the drafting committee, played a significant role in the formulation of this crucial provision. The committee recognized the importance of protecting life and liberty as fundamental rights, especially in the aftermath of India’s struggle for independence. Examining how Article 21 extends beyond mere existence and includes the right to a dignified life, encompassing aspects like health, clean environment, and basic amenities.
Delving into the concept of personal liberty and how it safeguards on individual’s freedom from arbitrary state action, including unlawful detention and imprisonment.
Discussing the impact of Article 21 on India’s legal landscape through landmark judgements, which have expanded the scope and interpretation of this right.
Analyzing the contemporary challenges and controversies surrounding Article 21, including issues related to the right to privacy, euthanasia, and custodial violence.
Contrasting Article 21 with similar provisions in other countries constitutions and international human rights instruments to highlight its uniqueness and importance.
Considering the evolving nature of human rights and technology, exploring how Article 21 may need to adapt to new challenges in the 21st century.
It will provide a comprehensive overview of Article 21, shedding light on its historical significance, legal interpretations, contemporary relevance, and its critical role in upholding the rights and liberties of Indian citizens. It will underscore how Article 21 continues to be a vital foundation stone of Indian democracy, ensuring that the state respects and protects the sanctity of life and personal liberty for all its citizens.
Introduction:
In the realm of fundamental rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution, Article 21 holds a place of paramount importance. It states, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.” This review serves as the cornerstone of individual liberties and forms the bedrock of the Indian legal system. Over the years, the interpretation and application of Article 21 have evolved through landmark judgements, making it a dynamic and ever- relevant provision.
This review aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of Article 21, delving into its historical context, judicial interpretations, and the evolving perspectives on the right to life and personal liberty in India.
Historical Context
The farmers of the Indian Constitution drew inspiration from various sources, including international conventions and the constitutions of other nations, while formulating the fundamental rights. The right to life and personal liberty in Article 21 bears resemblance to the ‘due process of law’ clause in the United States Constitutions Fifth Amendment and the ‘liberty’ clause in the Fourteenth Amendment.
However, the farmers of the Indian Constitution chose different phraseology for Article 21 to accommodate socio- economic rights within the scope of fundamental rights. The phrase “except according to the procedure established by law” was added to strike a balance between individual rights and the state’s power to enact laws.
Interpretation
The early interpretation of Article 21 was relatively narrow. In the case of A.K. Gopalan V. State of Madras (1950)1, the Supreme Court held that personal liberty and the right of life were separate and distinct. This interpretation implied that personal liberty could be curtailed as long as it followed the prescribed legal procedure.
The watershed moment in the interpretation of Article 21 came in the 1970s when the Supreme Court began adopting a broader perspective. The case of Maneka Gandhi V. Union of India (1978)2 marked a paradigm shift. The court held that “procedure established by law” must be just, fair, and reasonable, and it introduced the principle of “substantive due process.” This decision expanded the scope of Article 21, incorporating the principles of natural justice and reasonableness.
In K.S. Puttaswami V. Union of India (2017)3, the Supreme Court recognized the right to privacy as an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21. This landmark judgement established privacy as a fundamental right and provided a strong foundation for subsequent developments in personal liberty jurisprudence.
The courts have also acknowledged the right to live with dignity as an essential facet of Article 21. In the case of Francis Coralie Mullin V. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981)4, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of human dignity in interpreting this provision.
The right to live with dignity has been further strengthened through judgements that address issues such as custodial torture, inhuman and degrading treatment, and the rights of prisoners. For instance, in D.K. Basu V. State of West Bengal (1997)5, the Supreme Court laid down guidelines to prevent custodial violence and torture, emphasizing the need to protect the dignity of individuals even in police custody.
Article 21 has been interpreted to include a wide range of socio- economic rights, such as the right to education, health, and a clean environment. This expansive interpretation reflects the evolving socio- economic landscape of India.
The right to health is an essential component of the right to life. In Consumer Education and Research Centre V. Union of India (1995)1, the Supreme Court recognized that the right to health includes the right to medical care and treatment. This has been further emphasized in cases related to the right to access essential medicines and healthcare services.
The COVID- 19 pandemic brought the importance of the right to health into sharp focus, with the Supreme Court of India intervening in several cases to ensure the availability of medical resources, oxygen, and vaccines for citizens.
A clean and healthy environment is crucial for the well- being and life of individuals. In M.C. Mehta V. Union of India (1986)2, the Supreme Court held that the right to life under Article 21 includes the right to a clean environment. This judgement has been instrumental in environment protection and the prevention of pollution.
The court’s intervention in cases related to air pollution, water pollution, and deforestation underscores the significance of this aspect of Article 21in preserving life and health.
The right to education is considered a fundamental right and is closely linked to the right to life and personal liberty. In Unni Krishnan, J.P. V. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993)3 and subsequent cases, the Supreme Court held that the right to education is implicit in the right to life and personal liberty.
The Right to Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (commonly known as the RTE Act), further codified and operationalized the right to education for children aged 6 to 14 years, emphasizing the state’s responsibility to provide quality education.
The right to a fair trial is an essential component of personal liberty under Article 21. It includes the right to legal representation, the right to a speedy trial, the right to be heard, and the right to a judgement based on evidence. In Maneka Gandhi V. Union of India (1978)4and Hussainara Khatoon V. State of Bihar (1979)5, the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of a fair trial as a part of the due process of law.
The issue of death penalty in India has been the subject of considerable debate and litigation in relation to Article 21. While the Constitution itself does not explicitly prohibit the death penalty, the Supreme Court has laid down stringent guideline to ensure that it is imposed only in the rarest of rare cases, following a fair and just procedure.
In Bachan Singh V. State of Punjab (1980)1, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty but introduced the “rarest of rare” doctrine, which requires that the death penalty be imposed only in cases where the alternative punishment of life imprisonment is unquestionably inadequate. Subsequent judgements have reiterated and refined this principle.
Article 21 continues to be of paramount importance in contemporary India. In era of technological advancements, data- driven decision- making, and complex societal challenges, its interpretation and application have expanded to address new issues. Some of the key contemporary issues related to Article 21 include:
The advent of digital technology and the internet had raised important questions about the protection of digital privacy. The Supreme Court’s recognition of the right to privacy as part of Article 21 has significant implications for data protection and surveillance.
With growing concerns about climate change and environmental degradation, the right to a clean environment remains crucial. The court’s role in enforcing environmental regulations and holding violators accountable is essential for safeguarding the right to life.
The ongoing COVID- 19 pandemic has underscored the importance of healthcare access as a fundamental right. Ensuring equitable access to vaccines and healthcare services continues to be a pressing issue.
Issues such as custodial violence, prison conditions, and wrongful convictions highlight the need for ongoing reform in the criminal justice system to uphold the right to life and personal liberty.
The evolution of Article 21 has led to a more holistic understanding of human rights. Courts have recognized that rights are interconnected, and the violation of one right can impact others. For example, environmental degradation can infringe on the right to life and personal liberty by affecting public health.
Article 21 has been instrumental in safeguarding the rights of vulnerable groups, including women, children, and marginalized communities. Landmark decisions like Vishaka V. State of Rajasthan (1997)1 and NALSA V. Union of India (2014)2 have provided protection and recognition to these groups.
In the digital age, Article 21 has gained new dimensions. Issues like surveillance, data privacy, and the right to be forgotten are now intertwined with personal liberty concerns, prompting the courts to address emerging challenges.
The courts have consistently emphasized the need to strike a balance between individual rights and state interest. This is particularly relevant in cases involving national security, where the courts have sought to ensure that individual liberties are not unduly curtailed.
The first component of Article 21, the right to life, encompasses a broad range of rights and protections. It goes beyond mere existence and includes the right to live with dignity. The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that the right to life is not confined to mere animal existence but encompasses the right to enjoy all the aspects to life that make it meaningful and worth living.
The second component of Article 21, the right to personal liberty, guarantees individuals the freedom to live as they choose, subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by law. This includes the right to move freely, the right to privacy, and the right to be free from arbitrary arrest and detention. The right to personal liberty is crucial in preventing the abuse of power by the state and protecting individuals from arbitrary actions.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the fundamental rights to life and personal liberty. To improve or better it, we can consider advocating for the following:
Advocate for stronger legal protections of individual rights and freedoms.
Raise awareness about Article 21 and its importance among the public.
Work towards improving access to justice, especially for marginalized communities.
Advocate for police reforms to ensure that law enforcement respects citizens right.
Push for reforms in the prison system to ensure humane treatment of prisoners.
Promote gender equality and woman’s safety as an integral part of Article 21.
Advocate for robust data protection laws to safe guard citizens right to privacy.
Link Article 21 with environmental protection to ensure a healthy environment for all.
Raise awareness about mental health issues and advocate for mental healthcare access as part of the right to life.
Advocate for improved access to quality education, as education is closely linked to a better life.
Conclusion
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, the right to life and personal liberty, has evolved significantly since its inception. It has moved beyond a mere procedural safeguard to encompass a broad spectrum of civil, political, social, and economic right. The judiciary’s proactive role in expanding the scope of Article 21 has played a pivotal role in shaping India’s constitutional jurisprudence.
However, challenges remain, including the need for effective implementation of these rights, particularly for marginalized sections of society. Moreover, in an era marked by rapid technological advancements, the courts will continue to grapple with new questions concerning personal liberty and privacy.
In conclusion, Article 21 stands as a treatment to India’s commitment to upholding the dignity and rights of its citizen. Its journey from a limited right to a robust protector of human rights underscores the dynamic nature of constitutional and its ability to adapt to changing societal realities. The legacy of Article 21 serves as an enduring testament to the principles of justice, liberty, and equality that are at the heart of India’s democratic fabric.
