Article 21: Protection of Life and Personal Liberty
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
"No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law."
Meaning:
- Every person (citizen or non-citizen) has the right to live and enjoy personal freedom.
- The government cannot take away a person’s life or freedom unless it follows a proper legal process.
- The law must be fair, just, and reasonable.
Example:
Imagine a person is arrested without a valid reason.
- If the police arrest a person without any legal justification, it violates Article 21.
- However, if a person commits a crime and the court punishes them after a proper trial, it is considered legal.
🔹 Applicability: It applies to both citizens and non-citizens.
🔹 Scope: Over time, the Supreme Court has expanded its interpretation to include several fundamental rights such as:
- Right to livelihood
- Right to privacy
- Right to live with dignity
- Right to die with dignity
- Rights of prisoners for a dignified life
Also Read: Procedure Established by Law vs. Due Process of Law
Procedure Established by Law vs. Due Process of Law
| Parameter | Procedure Established by Law | Due Process of Law |
|---|---|---|
| Origin | Borrowed from the British Constitution | Borrowed from the U.S. Constitution |
| Scope | Only checks whether a law is enacted properly, but not whether it is fair, just, or reasonable | Examines both the procedural and substantive aspects of the law |
| Role of Judiciary | The judiciary’s role is limited to checking if the law was made using the correct procedure | The judiciary has the power to check if the law is just, fair, and non-arbitrary |
| Protection | Protects citizens from arbitrary executive action | Protects citizens from both executive and legislative actions |
| Constitutional Provision | Explicitly mentioned in Article 21 | Not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution |
🔹 India follows the "Procedure Established by Law" principle but, through judicial interpretations (e.g., the Menaka Gandhi case), it has moved closer to the Due Process of Law concept by ensuring fairness and non-arbitrariness.
Important Judgments Related to Article 21
1. A.K. Gopalan Case (1950) – Limited Protection of Liberty
🟢 What Happened?
A.K. Gopalan, a Communist leader, was arrested under the Preventive Detention Act (a law that allowed imprisonment without trial). He argued that this law violated his Right to Personal Liberty (Article 21).
🟢 What Did the Supreme Court Say?
- The court said that Article 21 only protects against unfair actions by the government (executive), but not against laws made by Parliament (legislative).
- The government only needs to follow the procedure established by law to take away someone’s liberty, even if the law is unfair or unjust.(The government can take away a person’s freedom as long as it follows the rules written in the law, even if the law itself is unfair.)
- The court refused to check whether the law itself was fair or not.
🟢 Example:
- If a new law allows the government to arrest someone without a fair trial, then under the Gopalan judgment, the law would still be valid as long as proper legal procedures were followed.
🟢 Impact:
- This judgment gave more power to the government and weakened the protection of personal liberty.
- It did not protect citizens from unfair laws, only from arbitrary actions by the government.
2. Menaka Gandhi Case (1978) – Expanded the Meaning of Liberty
🟢 What Happened?
Menaka Gandhi, a journalist, had her passport taken away by the government without any explanation. She challenged this decision, saying it violated her Right to Personal Liberty (Article 21).
🟢 What Did the Supreme Court Say?
- The court overturned the A.K. Gopalan case and said that Article 21 protects citizens from both unfair government actions and unfair laws.
- The government must follow a procedure that is fair, just, and reasonable.
- The meaning of "life and personal liberty" was expanded to include:
- Right to Dignity
- Right to Travel
- Right to Personal Growth
🟢 Example:
- If the government makes a law that prevents people from traveling without any valid reason, then under the Menaka Gandhi judgment, the court can strike down the law if it is unfair or arbitrary.
🟢 Impact:
- Strengthened citizens' fundamental rights.
- Ensured that no law can take away life or liberty unfairly.
- Moved India closer to the "Due Process of Law" system (where laws must be fair and just).
3. Right to Privacy (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy Case, 2017)
🟢 What Happened?
The government made Aadhaar (biometric ID) mandatory for getting bank accounts, SIM cards, and other services. The question was whether this violated the Right to Privacy.
🟢 What Did the Supreme Court Say?
- Right to Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
- Privacy includes:
- Personal choices (e.g., whom to marry)
- Autonomy (e.g., what to eat)
- Dignity (e.g., medical records protection)
- The government cannot collect private data without a strong reason.
🟢 Example:
- If the government tracks your phone calls or internet usage without your consent, it would violate your Right to Privacy unless it has a valid legal reason.
🟢 Impact:
- Strengthened protection against government surveillance.
- Limited the government's power to collect and use personal data.
- Gave citizens more control over their personal information.
4. Right to Die with Dignity (Common Cause Case, 2018)
🟢 What Happened?
A petition was filed to recognize passive euthanasia (allowing terminally ill patients to refuse life support) as a fundamental right under Article 21.
🟢 What Did the Supreme Court Say?
- Right to Die with Dignity is a part of Article 21.
- Allowed Passive Euthanasia, meaning a person can refuse medical treatment if they are suffering from a terminal illness.
- Introduced Living Wills (Advance Directives) – a document where a person writes their wish to refuse treatment in the future if they become terminally ill.
🟢 Example:
- A patient suffering from a severe, incurable disease can choose to stop life support or refuse painful treatments.
🟢 Impact:
- Gave legal recognition to passive euthanasia.
- Strengthened the right of individuals to make decisions about their own life and body.
Summary
- A.K. Gopalan case (1950) – Limited protection of liberty (only against government actions).
- Menaka Gandhi case (1978) – Expanded Article 21 to include fairness and justice.
- Right to Privacy case (2017) – Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21.
- Right to Die with Dignity case (2018) – Allowed passive euthanasia for terminally ill patients.
Conclusion
- Article 21 is the most interpreted fundamental right in Indian constitutional history.
- Originally, it had a narrow scope (A.K. Gopalan case), but over time, it evolved into an umbrella of rights (Menaka Gandhi, Puttaswamy, Common Cause cases).
- Today, it guarantees not just physical survival but a life with dignity, privacy, and personal choice.
