In which case did the Supreme Court hold that the procedure for depriving a person of life or personal liberty under Article 21 must be fair, just and reasonable?
- A.Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
- B.A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950)
- C.Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967)
- D.Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980)
Correct answer
Explanation
The correct answer is Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978). Article 21 says that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to "procedure established by law". In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) the Supreme Court read this narrowly: any procedure laid down by a validly made law was enough, however unfair. In Maneka Gandhi, a case about the impounding of a passport, the Court rejected that approach and held that the procedure must be fair, just and reasonable, not arbitrary or oppressive. In effect this brought Article 21 close to the American idea of due process.
This decision opened the way for courts to read many rights into Article 21, such as the rights to live with dignity, to a speedy trial and, later, to privacy. The other options are real cases on different questions: Gopalan is the narrow view that Maneka Gandhi overturned, Golaknath (1967) held that Parliament could not abridge Fundamental Rights, and Minerva Mills (1980) held that the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is part of the basic structure.
Read the full article: Fundamental Rights (Articles 12–35): Notes, Writs and PYQs
Practice Questions
View allThe Fundamental Rights in the Indian Constitution are inspired by the ‘Bill of Rights’ of which of the following countries?
- A.Australia
- B.Japan
- C.The USSR
- D.The USA
Show answer
The Bill of Rights is the name given to the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States, adopted in 1791, which protect freedoms such as speech and religion against the government.
Read the full explanation →Which of the following is NOT a fundamental right after the 44th Amendment Act, 1978 of Indian Constitution?
- A.Right to property
- B.Right to equality
- C.Right against exploitation
- D.Right to religion
Show answer
When the Constitution came into force, property was protected as a Fundamental Right in two places: Article 19(1)(f), the freedom to acquire, hold and dispose of property, and Article 31, protection against being deprived of property.
Read the full explanation →The Fundamental Rights have been guaranteed to protect the public from repressive state actions; judicial decisions tend to expand the scope of the word 'State' as defined by _______ of the Indian Constitution.
- A.Article 12
- B.Article 14
- C.Article 15
- D.Article 13
Show answer
Most Fundamental Rights are claims against the State, so whoever counts as the "State" is bound by them.
Read the full explanation →Which article of the Constitution of India abolishes the concept of ‘untouchability’ and prohibits its practice in any shape or form?
- A.16
- B.15
- C.17
- D.14
Show answer
Article 17 abolishes untouchability, forbids its practice in any form, and makes the enforcement of any disability arising out of untouchability an offence punishable in accordance with law.
Read the full explanation →Article 19 of the Indian Constitution provides for how many types of freedoms?
- A.13
- B.44
- C.30
- D.6
Show answer
Article 19(1) gives every citizen six freedoms: speech and expression; to assemble peaceably and without arms; to form associations, unions or co-operative societies; to move freely throughout India; to reside and settle in any part of India; and to practise any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business.
Read the full explanation →