GURU GOBIND SINGH

INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY DWARKA,

DELHI- 110064

MAHARAJA SURAJMAL INSTITUTE

Subject Code: LRM
Submitted to: Submitted by:
Ms.Kirti Dhaiya Name- Prakrity Jaiswal
Enrollment No.- 04414903522

IInd Semester

Page: 1
INTRODUCTION
Fundamental Rights have been considered to one of the most essential part of our constitution
as it is regarded soul of our Constitution. It guarantees to its citizen many rights which is
essential for the survival of the members in the society. It involves deal in with the basic
rights of the citizen such as equality before the law, freedom of speech and expression and
and many more such rights. Part III of the Indian Constitution deals with the fundamental
rights offered to its citizen.

Among all the rights guaranteed under part III of the Constitution, Article 21 guarantees a
right which is the most important for the survival of the humankind. Article 21 states that "No
person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure
established by law." The primary aim of this fundamental Right is to serve as a protection to
counter infringement on a person's liberty or dignity. This assistance is accessible to every
"person" whether or not they are nationals of India, as ascertained in the case of The
Chairman, Railway Board & Ors vs Mrs Chandrima Das & Ors 1. It is one of the most crucial
fundamental rights, encompassing many distinct subsidiary rights budding out. It is not latent,
rather an evolving section of the legislation. It is compelling to observe ahead the literal
interpretation of this Article to furnish the current synopsis. Additionally, in light of judicial
activism, there is a need to interrelate this Article with other provisions, to experience it with
a more productive and progressive outlook, which is comprehensive of modern society.

HISTORY

The parliamentary memoir of Article 21 is that initially, Constituent Assembly had passed it
as Article 15 which provided that "No person shall be deprived of his life or liberty without
the due process of law."2 After that, the Drafting Committee recommended two improvements
to Article 15. First, the inclusion of the word "personal" before the word "liberty." Second,
replacement of the expression "without due process of law" with "except according to the
procedure established by law." The Drafting Committee passed the second amendment
because it believed that the word "due process " was exploited in the American legal system.

1 (2000) 2 SCC 465.

2 H.M., Seervai, Constitutional Law of India, 4th edn. Vol. 2, (New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt.
Ltd. 2010), p. 970.

Page: 2
Besides, it was the outcome of a discussion which the Constitutional Assembly Advisor, Sir
B.N. Rau had with Frankfurter J. of the United States of America Supreme Court, who
communicated that due process clause is undemocratic and oppressive to the judiciary
because it authorized judges to nullify the legislation passed by democratic majorities.

IMPORTANCE

Article 21 of the Constitution of India prevents the deprivation of rights except through
procedures established by law. It is the heart or bedrock of our Constitution. It is the purest
and reformist provision in our Constitution and is valid for every citizen of India as well as
foreign citizens. Either it is by the British Magna Carta (1215) which states that "No free man
shall be taken or imprisoned or deceased or outlawed or banished or any ways destroyed, nor
will the King pass upon him or commit him to prison unless by the judgment of his peers or
the law of the land"3. Or from the Universal Declaration, 1948, Article 3 saying "Everyone
has the right to life, liberty and security of person" 4 Or conferring to the Article 9 which
provides that "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile." 5 Or by Article
2 of the statement of the European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 which states that
"Everyone's Right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life
intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime
for which this penalty is provided by law." 6 Or only by The Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights under Article 9 (1) of the U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 saying
"Everyone has the Right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to
arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds
and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law" 7, All of these have
acknowledged a human being as a corporal entity and strived to safeguard him from the
exploitation by rulers or State by itself. However, It is only in India under Article 21 of the
Constitution that has visualized the human being in entirety and endeavoured for his complete
well-being, prosperity, all-round development, and freedom from suffering and, tried to
protect his life and limb from any outside aggression by State or its bureaus such as the
Government Departments, administration,

3 Magna Carta, 1215.

4 Article 3, the Universal Declaration, 1948.
5 Article 9, the Universal Declaration, 1948.
6 Article 2, the statement of the European Convention on Human Rights, 1950.
7
Article 9 (1), the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966.

Page: 3
THE AMBIT OF ARTICLE 21

Article 21 states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to the procedure established by law." Therefore, Article 21 provides two primary
rights: (1) Right to Life. (2) Right to Personal Liberty. Even though it is one of the greatest
significant fundamental rights, as per other rights, this Right is not absolute and, apart from
safeguarding the fundamental human rights, Article 21 provides for the reasonable
restrictions on the same by way of procedure established by law, as to avoid the situations of
ambiguity in the society.

• RIGHT TO LIFE

Right to life is vital to our very survival without which we cannot exist as a human being and
encompasses all those perspectives of life, which go to conceive a man's life essential,
comprehensive, and worth living. It is the only Article in the Constitution that has undergone
the broadest permissible interpretations. It also includes the Right to shelter, growth, and
nourishment. It is so because, it is the bare necessity, least and primary requirements that are
indispensable and unavoidable for a person for the Right to life and other rights.

• RIGHT TO PERSONAL LIBERTY

Liberty of a person is one of the most traditional notions to be preserved by national courts.
The English Magna Carta, 1215, gave that "no free man shall be taken or imprisoned, but...
By the law of the land."7

The SC of India has rebuffed the view that liberty expresses freedom from physical
circumscribe solely. It remarked that liberation comprises those right and opportunities that
have long perceived as being indispensable to the systematic pursuance of peace by free man.

Dicey says Personal liberty means an individual right not to be constrained to custody, arrest
or other bodily oppression in any manner without the acceptance of legal justification.

The case of A.K. Gopalan v. the State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27 (Preventive Detention Act,
1950) has developed Article 21 a long way through a range of various authoritative
declarations by the Apex Court. In this case, the Court narrowed down the meaning and

7 Supra note 3.

Page: 4
scope of "personal liberty" and held that the term "personal liberty" meant only freedom of
the physical body and that Articles 19 (1) (d) and Article 21 have to treated separately.8

• THE EXPANDING AMBIT OF ARTICLE 21

The ambit of Article 21 has extended over the years through judicial precedents. The
expansion of this Article is like a journey started with the case of A.K. Gopalan and is
twisting its way, back from the Maneka Gandhi case till today.

The Apex Court held A.K.Gopalan case (1950) 9 that the contents and subject material of
Article 21 and 19 (1) (d) are not alike, and they progress on total principles. In this case, the
word deprivation was interpreted in a narrow sense, and it was held that the denial does not
restrict upon the Right to move freely which came under Article 19 (1) (d). The SC held that
the expression 'procedure established by law' in the Constitution had embodied the British
concept rather than the American 'due process'.

But the Maneka Gandhi case reversed the Gopalan decision. Here, S.C. stated that Articles 19
and 21 are not watertight chambers. The notion of personal liberty under Article 21 has a
broad 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 the law for
the deprivation of life or liberty of a person must not be unfair, unreasonable or arbitrary.15

With the advent of time, Article 21 has been interpreted in such a liberal sense that now, it
includes certain more rights, which helps a person to live such as the Right to live with
dignity, right to sleep, right to die, and many more.

Hence,Article 21 is very essential for a society to function without any interruption.

8 A.K. Gopalan v. the State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.

9 Supra note 11. 15
Supra note 12.

Page: 5