Article 21

ARTICLE 21
Article 21 is one article which has been transformed by the Supreme court that it is now
encompassable to all human rights within its essence. On a plain reading it is a directive to
the state to refrain from infringing the right to life or personal liberty of a person. the rights
guaranteed under this article are available to both citizens and non-citizens. Article 21 is
controlled by Article 19 i.e., it must satisfy the requirements of Article 19 also. These rights
can only be claimed against the state (defined in Article 12) not against a private individual.
These rights are also available to foreign individuals.
Article 21 basically has two types of right –
(i) Right to life;
(ii) Right to personal Liberty.
Kharak Singh Vs. State of UP- By the term life as here used something more is
meant than mere animal existence. The prohibition against its deprivation encompasses all
those organs and faculties through which life is appreciated, such as culture, ethics, level of
living, etc. The clause also forbids the destruction of any other organs of the body through
which the soul interacts with the outside world, such as the amputation of an armoured leg or
the removal of an eye.
Similarly, in the case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration – court held that the
right to life included the right to lead a healthy life so as to enjoy all faculties of the human
body in their prime conditions. It would even include the right to protection of a person’s
tradition, culture, heritage, and all that gives meaning to a man’s life. It includes the right to
live in peace, to sleep in peace and the right to repose and health.
Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India - Here, the SC said that Articles 19 and 21 are
not watertight compartments. The idea of personal liberty in Article 21 has a wide scope
including many rights, some of which are embodied under Article 19, thus giving them
‘additional protection’. The court also held that a law that comes under Article 21 must
satisfy the requirements under Article 19 as well. That means any procedure under law for the
deprivation of life or liberty of a person must not be unfair, unreasonable, or arbitrary. Read
the Maneka Gandhi case in detail in the linked article. After this judgement article 21 now
protects the right to life and personal liberty not only from the executive action but also from
the legislative actions.
Meaning and scope of Personal Liberty:

In the case of A.K. Golapan Vs. State of Madras – a person was under detention under
Preventive Detention Act, 1950. He challenged this under the violation of his right to
freedom of movement under Article 19. The courts declared that ‘liberty’ does not include all
that is implied in the term ‘liberty’ (means all types of freedom). Thus, personal liberty only
means liberty relating to person or a body of the individual.
Later in Fazal Ali J¸ gave a dissenting opinion saying that ‘personal liberty’ means freedom
of movement and locomotion. Hence, any law which deprives a person of his personal liberty
must satisfy the ambit of both Article 19 and 21.
In Maneka Gandhi case, supreme court has given the most possible interpretation of the
term personal liberty. A valid law interfering with personal liberty must satisfy a triple test-
1. It must prescribe a procedure
2. The procedure must withstand the test prescribed in Article 19
3. It must not infringe Article 14 (means the procedure must be reasonable i.e., just and
fair).
The supreme court held that it is not necessary that a right must be specifically mentioned
in a particular Article; even if it is not mentioned in any of the Articles specifically, it may be
fundamental right through a wider interpretation of an Article. The term ‘personal liberty’
covers a wider ranges of rights more than those which are mentioned in the Article 19.
Some of the implied fundamental rights are given below:
1. Right to speedy trial (Hussainara Khatoon Vs State of Bihar)
2. Right to travel abroad (Maneka Gandhi case)
3. Right to dignity (Maneka Gandhi case)
4. Right to privacy (Govind Vs State of MP)
5. Right to clean environment (MC Mehta Vs. UOI)
6. Right to livelihood (Olega Tellis Case)
7. Right to education (Mohini Jain case)
8. Right to marriage (Lata Singh Vs State of UP)
9. Right against torture (Khatri Vs State of Bihar)
10. Right against bondage (Bandhua Mukti Morcha case)
11. Right to legal aid (Khatri VS State of Bihar; Sheela Barse Vs Union)
12. Right to food
Right to dignity: In Maneka Gandhi case, the court held that the right to live is not
merely confined to physical existence but it includes within its ambit the right to live with
human dignity. In Fransic case, it was held that human dignity includes all the bare
necesseties of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing shelter, facilities for education writing,
moving freely, etc.
Right to Privacy: in the case of Govind Vs State of MP the court held that police
regulations authorizing domiciliary visits were constitutional. As regards the right to privacy,
the court said that the right to privacy would necessarily have to go through a process of case
by case development. In a landmark judgement, a minor girl was pregnant and wanted to give
birth to the child, the public prosecutor argued that the girl had the right to bear the child
under the broader right to privacy, the madras high court declared that even a minor had a
right to privacy under Article 21. The constitution does not make any distinction between
minor and major as far as fundamental rights are concerned.
Right to travel abroad: In maneka Gandhi case, it was held that right to travel
abroad and leave India is included in personal liberty under Article 21. Similarly, In the case
of Satwant Singh it was held that right leave india was a part of personal liberty which could
be restricted only by authority law. The contention of the government was that a passport was
a political document and no one had a legal right over it. The court rejected the contention
and held tha personal liberty under Article 21 takes in the right to locomotion.
Right to food: in PUCL Vs. Union of India it was held that people who are starving
because of their inability to purchase food grains have right to get food under Article 21. The
people who are included in such situation are those who are aged, infirm, disabled, pregnant
women destitute children.
Right to marriage: In Lata Singh Vs State of UP it was held that right to life
includes ‘right to marriage’. A major boy/girl undergoing inter-case of inter-religion marriage
are to be protected against harassment, threats or acts of violence; and strict actions should be
taken against person who give threats.
Right to Livelihood (work): in Olega Tellis case, the petitioners challenged the
removal of huts from public places on the ground that their removal amounted to depriving
them of their right to livelihood. It was held that right to livelihood can be curbed or curtailed
by following just and fair procedures. The restrictions placed on the right of livelihood of
slum dwellers are reasonable because it is in the interest of general public. Public streets are
not meant for carrying on trade of business.
Right to legal aid: In the case of Khatoon Vs State of Bihar- it was held that right to
free service is clearly an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair, just procedure for a person
accused of an offense and it must be held implicit in Article 21. Later in the case of Khatri vs
State of Bihar it was held that state cannot avoid its constitutional obligation to provide free
legal services.
Right to education: in the cae of Mohini Jain Vs Staet of Karnataka it was held that
the framers of the constitution made it clear for state to provide education for its citizens. The
right to education is considered to be a fundamental right as the right to freedom of speech
and expression cannot be fully enjoyed unless a citizen is educated. Therefore, the courts
observed that state is under a constitutional mandate to provide education at all levels and has
to establish educational institutions at all levels.
Right to

Article 21

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 21

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article 21

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ARTICLE 21

Meaning and scope of Personal Liberty:

You might also like