Article 21 Interpretation: Law as Just, Fair, and Reasonable
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The interpretation of the term 'law' within this Article has evolved significantly through landmark Supreme Court judgments.
The Maneka Gandhi Ruling
In the pivotal case of Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court of India expanded the scope of Article 21. The Court held that the 'procedure established by law' under Article 21 must not only be a legally enacted procedure but must also be:
- Just
- Fair
- Reasonable
This landmark judgment established that any law depriving a person of their life or personal liberty must satisfy these substantive standards, moving beyond mere procedural compliance.
Distinction from A.K. Gopalan Case
Prior to the Maneka Gandhi case, the judgment in A.K. Gopalan v/s State of Madras had adopted a narrower interpretation, suggesting that 'law' simply meant the law enacted by the legislature, irrespective of its fairness.
The Maneka Gandhi decision effectively overruled the restrictive interpretation laid down in A.K. Gopalan, introducing the principle that the 'law' must be inherently fair and reasonable in its substance and application, thereby deepening the protection offered by Article 21.
Important Questions from Constitution Law
- In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court held that 'the preamble is the part of the constitution' ?
- Clause(5) of article-15 has been added to the constitution by :
- Rights of a citizen under Article-19 are automatically suspended during the period of emergency, if emergency under Article-352 is declared on the grounds of :
- Which cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly.' – This statement epitomises the doctrine of :
- Which of the following statements is/are correct ?
(i) When the court declares certain provisions of the Act as invalid and affects the validity of that Act, this principle is known as Doctrine of Severability.
(ii) It is the perspective character of Article 13(1) which gives rise to the Doctrine of Eclipse.
(iii) The American doctrine of waiver of Fundamental Rights is part of the Indian Constitution.
(iv) The doctrine of perspective overruling was not applied in I.C. Golaknath vs State of Punjab.
Choose the correct answer from the code given below :
