No Of Articles In The Indian Constitution

Article 21 is fundamental of all the fundamental right and most interpreted Article of the Constitution.

Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty

Article 63 The Vice-President of India Article 64 The Vice-President to be ex-officio chairman the Council of States. Article 66 Election of Vice-president Article 72 Pardoning powers of President. Article 74 Council of Ministers to aid and advise President. Article 76 Attorney-General for India. Article 79 Constitution of Parliament.
Union of India, quashed the amendments to Articles 31C and 368 as it was in contravention with the basic structure of the Constitution. 43rd: Amend articles 145, 226, 228 and 366. Remove articles 31D, 32A, 131A, 144A, 226A and 228A. 13 April 1978 Amendment passed after revocation of internal emergency in the Country.
Union Cabinet in India English Constitution Leaves the entire system Cabinet to convention, the crown being legally vested with absolute powers and ministers being in theory nothing more than the servants of the Crown.

Sep 05, 2020 Article 15 and 16 of the Indian Constitution already provided the principle of equal rights and freedom to the people of all religions in India without any discrimination. Additional to that the Constituent Assembly felt the need to incorporate two more provisions to protect and secure the religious rights of its citizens in the forms of. The Indian constitution is the world's longest for a sovereign nation. At its enactment, it had 395 articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules. At about 145,000 words, it is the second-longest active constitution—after the Constitution of Alabama —in the world. The constitution has a preamble and 470 articles, which are grouped into 25 parts.

No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

-Text in Constitution

Explanation of Article 21

Article 21 is available to both citizens and non-citizens. This is not absolute article restriction apply by establish law.

Main three keyword are describe in article 21

Life
Personal Liberty
Procedure Establish By Law

Current form of this article evolve case by case basic, so let we understand with the help of various cases.

1. Life

In many cases, supreme court derives or inferred many rights which declared as a part of Article 21. There are more than 30+ right and further counting.

Right to live with human dignity.
Right to reputation.
Right to livelihood.
Right to privacy.
Right to shelter.
Right to health.
Right to free education up to 14 years of age.
Right against bonded labour.
Right to free legal aid.
Right to speedy trial.
Right against handcuffing.
Right against delayed execution.
Right against solitary confinement.
Right to travel abroad.
Right to fair trial.
Right against inhuman treatment.
Right against custodial harassment.
Right to timely medical treatment in hospital
Right not to be driven out of a state.
Right of prisoners to have necessities of life.
Right to emergency medical aid. government
Right of appeal from a judgment of conviction
Right of women to be treated with decency and dignity.
Right against sexual harassment at workplace
Right against rape
Right against public hanging.
Right to hearing.
Right to information.
Right to social security and protection of the family
Right to electricity
Right against bar fetters
Right to appropriate life insurance policy
Right to social and economic justice and empowerment
Right to sleep
Right to freedom from noise pollution
Right to decent environment including pollution-free water and air and protection against hazardous industries.
Right against Illegal Detention (have to Prove illegal)

No Of Articles In Indian Constitution 2021

Some rights which are Not part of article 21

Right to work
Right to Die(Suicide)
Right to Anticipatory Bail, etc.

When Was The Constitution Adopted?It Was Adopted On By The Constituent Assembly On 26th November 1949.

This all rights shows the features of the flexibility of the Indian constitution.

No Of Articles In The Indian Constitution

Generally, people thought that if they have the Right to do then they also have the right not to do. Mean I have the right to live than I have the right not lived(Right to die) also.

No, that is not true in Gian Kaur vs State of Panjab 1996 case Supreme court say that ‘In the Indian constitution no waiver allowed for the fundamental right’.

Means no one shall deny to take fundamental right, no person say that I don’t want right to life or other right.

Kharak Singh vs State of UP 1963 case the court held that the ‘right to life’ as embodied in Article 21 is not merely confined to animal existence or survival.

But if includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity and all those aspects of life which go to make a man’s life meaningful, complete and worth living.

Right to Death/Suicide

In the Gyan Pal case, SC has settled the controversy by clearly establishing that there is no right to suicide and death. Thus section 309 of IPC, which criminalizes attempt to suicide doesn’t violate Article 21.

Euthanasia/Mercy killing

Aruna Shaunbag case, SC permitted passive euthanasia but not active euthanasia.

Active Euthanasia means ending the life of a person by giving him active means like lethal injections, drugs, etc.

Passive Euthanasia means taking out the life support systems. It is allowed by SC to be done under guarded circumstances only.

2. Personal Liberty

A.K.Gopalan vs State of Madras court held that only two conditions consider as a violation of personal liberty 1. Physical restrain(Body of Person) 2. In the case of cohesion.

This is a narrow interpretation. But, in the Menaka Gandhi case(1978), the supreme court overruled its judgment by taking a wider interpretation of Article 21.

In that court say that any law that have infringe personal liberty have to pass three procedure

Reasonability,
Fairness and
Justiciable (Explain in due process of law)

And wider the protection against physical restraint to all Psychological restrain.

3. Procedure Establish By Law

The concept originated from the United Kingdom under this doctrine when a person is deprived of his life and liberty then the court will examine-

If or not there is a law in existence which authorizes the executive to deprive of his life and liberty?
The further court will examine whether the law was passed by a competent legislature or not?
The further court will also check whether the law which has been used by the executive was following procedure or not?

If any action of executive not follow above process or condition then that action consider illegal.

The court however will not examine the fairness of law or the motive of law and thus can not be declared the law unconstitutional and void.

This doctrine is available only against arbitrary executive action and not from arbitrary legislative action.

The procedure established by law relies more on a good sense of legislature. Which suitable for UK legislation not for Indian. (Balance of Power issue)

Constitution Assembly Debate:

B.R.Ambedar wants to use the phrase ‘Due process of law’ in Article 21 but Sir Alldi Krishnaswamy Aiyar put to argue that ‘In future, we want to make social legislation then procedure establish by law will more suitable’.

Maneka Gandhi Case (1978)

Supreme Court accepted that due process is inherent in the procedure established by law. SC in this case applied the United States American principle of “due process of law” for the first time. It applied the following arguments:

Article 19 and 21 can’t be understood as watertight compartments and the same criteria of reasonableness must be applied for Article 21 too.
Merely following the procedure established by law is not enough. The courts have the right to review and question the reasonableness of the law itself.
Restrictions must be reasonable, just and fair and shouldn’t be arbitrary.

In India, traditionally we followed the principle of “Procedure Established by Law”. However, since the 1978 Menaka Gandhi case we have followed “Due Process of Law” also.

Read Due Process of Law

Emergency And Article 21

Before 44^th Amendment:

A.D.M Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla 1976 SC held that article 21 can be suspended under article 359 in anemergency situation.

After 44^th Amendment:

Due to violation of human rights in 1975-77 emergency, Amendment made in Article 359 and make provision that article 21 and article 22 both can not be suspended in an emergency.

Comments are closed.