Protection of Life and Personal Liberty

Constitutional Text

• Article 21 states that no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
• It applies to citizens as well as non-citizens.
• It acts as the core of India’s fundamental rights framework.

Landmark Case Laws Related to Article 21

A.K. Gopalan vs State of Madras (1950)

• Supreme Court adopted a literal interpretation of Article 21.
• Held that “procedure established by law” only required a validly enacted law, not fairness or reasonableness.
• Articles 19 and 21 were treated as independent and separate.

Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India (1978)

• Turning point in Article 21 jurisprudence.
• Court held that the procedure must be just, fair, and reasonable, not arbitrary or oppressive.
• Articles 14, 19, and 21 were read together, establishing the doctrine of due process in substance.
• Expanded the scope of “personal liberty” beyond mere physical restraint.

Francis Coralie Mullin vs Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981)

• Court held that the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity.
• It covers necessities such as nutrition, clothing, shelter, and opportunities for self-development.

Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)

• Recognised right to livelihood as an integral part of the right to life.
• Held that deprivation of livelihood without due process would amount to deprivation of life.

Hussainara Khatoon vs State of Bihar (1979)

• Established the right to speedy trial as a fundamental right under Article 21.
• Highlighted the plight of undertrial prisoners and judicial delays.

Sunil Batra vs Delhi Administration (1978)

• Expanded Article 21 to include prisoners’ rights.
• Held that prisoners do not lose their fundamental rights except those restricted by incarceration.
• Prohibited inhuman and degrading treatment in prisons.

Bachan Singh vs State of Punjab (1980)

• Upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty, but restricted its use to the “rarest of rare cases”.
• Linked sentencing principles to Article 21.

Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1993)

• Recognised the right to education as part of Article 21.
• Later led to the insertion of Article 21A by constitutional amendment.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2017)

• Declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21.
• Privacy recognised as intrinsic to dignity, autonomy, and personal liberty.

Common Cause vs Union of India (2018)

• Recognised right to die with dignity as part of Article 21.
• Allowed passive euthanasia under strict safeguards.

Rights Derived from Article 21

Personal and Civil Liberties

• Right to live with dignity
• Right to privacy
• Right to reputation
• Right to free movement
• Right against custodial torture

Socio-Economic Rights

• Right to livelihood
• Right to health
• Right to clean environment
• Right to shelter
• Right to education

Criminal Justice Safeguards

• Right to speedy trial
• Right to legal aid
• Protection against solitary confinement
• Protection against arbitrary arrest and detention

Importance of Article 21

• Acts as the foundation of human rights jurisprudence in India.
• Enables courts to respond to changing social, economic, and technological realities.
• Serves as a bridge between civil-political rights and socio-economic justice.

• Article 21 has evolved from a narrow procedural guarantee into a comprehensive charter of human dignity.
• Judicial creativity has transformed it into the most expansive and enforceable fundamental right in the Constitution.