Article 21: life and personal liberty
How the Court has read life and liberty: fair procedure, privacy and dignity.
15 of the 71 judgments in our library on this topic: the ones other judgments here cite most, oldest first.
0 of 15 read
Start: A.K. Gopalan v. State of MadrasYour progress is kept in this browser. Sign in to keep it on every device and count it in your reading streak.
19 May 1950 · 6 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
A.K. Gopalan v. State of MadrasThe majority upheld the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, except Section 14, holding that 'law' in Article 21 means State-made law and that preventive detention is not tested under Article 19; the habeas corpus petition was dismissed.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
15 March 1954 · 8 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
M.P. Sharma v. Satish ChandraSearch and seizure of documents under a warrant issued under Sections 94 and 96 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 is not compelled testimony under Article 20(3) and does not violate Article 19(1)(f); the petitions were dismissed.
On this path for: Right to privacy
18 December 1962 · 6 judges · cited by 6 judgments in this library
Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar PradeshThe Court struck down the provision for night-time domiciliary visits in the U.P. Police Regulations as violating personal liberty under Article 21, but held that the other forms of police surveillance infringed no fundamental right.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution; Personal liberty; Right to privacy
25 January 1978 · 7 judges · cited by 17 judgments in this library
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of IndiaProcedure under Article 21 must be right, just and fair, not arbitrary; Articles 14, 19 and 21 are not mutually exclusive; a hearing is implied in Section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act, which was held valid.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
30 August 1978 · 5 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Sunil Batra v. Delhi AdministrationReading down Sections 30(2) and 56 of the Prisons Act, 1894, the Court held that a prisoner under sentence of death cannot be kept in solitary confinement and that bar fetters may be imposed only on recorded, individual safety grounds.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
9 April 1980 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of PunjabThe Constitution Bench held that the discretion of the High Court and Court of Session to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is wide and must not be cut down by reading in limitations the legislature did not impose.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution; Personal liberty
9 May 1980 · 5 judges · cited by 5 judgments in this library
Bachan Singh v. State of PunjabBy 4:1, the Court upheld the death penalty for murder under Section 302 IPC and the sentencing procedure in Section 354(3) CrPC, holding that death may be imposed only in the rarest of rare cases.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
16 December 1983 · 3 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of IndiaA letter alleging bonded labour in Faridabad stone quarries was maintainable under Article 32; the Court rejected objections to its commissioners' reports, presumed forced labourers to be bonded, and issued directions to the Union and Haryana.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution; Right to live with human dignity
24 March 1993 · 3 judges · cited by 3 judgments in this library
Nilabati Behera v. State of OrissaCompensation under Articles 32 and 226 for violation of fundamental rights is a public law remedy based on strict liability, to which sovereign immunity does not apply; Orissa was ordered to pay Rs. 1,50,000 for a custodial death.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
13 February 1996 · 2 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of IndiaChemical industries that polluted soil and groundwater at Bichhri were held absolutely liable under the Oleum Gas Leak rule and the polluter pays principle to bear the cost of remedial measures, and their plants were ordered closed.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
21 March 1996 · 5 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Gian Kaur v. State of PunjabA Constitution Bench held that Article 21 does not include a 'right to die', overruled P. Rathinam, and upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 306 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
13 August 1997 · 3 judges · cited by 4 judgments in this library
Vishaka v. State of RajasthanIn the absence of legislation, the Court laid down binding guidelines and norms to prevent sexual harassment of women at all work places, reading international conventions such as CEDAW into Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
9 July 2008 · 2 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Noor Aga v. State of PunjabSections 35 and 54 of the NDPS Act, which place a reverse burden on the accused, are not unconstitutional, but the prosecution must first prove the foundational facts strictly; as recovery was not proved, the conviction was set aside.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution
2 July 2014 · 2 judges · cited by 2 judgments in this library
Arnesh Kumar v. State of BiharPolice must not arrest automatically for offences punishable with up to seven years; they must record why arrest is necessary under Section 41 CrPC, and Magistrates must scrutinise those reasons before authorising detention.
On this path for: Personal liberty
24 August 2017 · 9 judges · cited by 4 judgments in this library
Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of IndiaThe right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and of the Part III freedoms; M P Sharma and Kharak Singh are overruled on that point.
On this path for: Article 21, Constitution; Right to privacy
Test yourself: 170 practice questions on landmark judgments, with explanations.