At 75, Constitutional Justice and Personal Liberty

Context:

As India celebrates 75 years of its Constitution, the debates surrounding constitutional justice and personal liberty have become more relevant than ever. Recent judicial pronouncements on preventive detention, the use of sedition laws, and digital surveillance have reignited discussions on the balance between state security and individual freedoms. The Supreme Court’s interventions in cases related to arbitrary arrests, media freedom, and privacy violations highlight the evolving nature of Article 21 protections. In a landmark event, the apex court recently ruled on a case concerning prolonged detention under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), stressing the need for stricter judicial oversight to prevent misuse. Simultaneously, concerns over government surveillance programs, including the use of Pegasus spyware, have raised alarm bells about privacy breaches.

In this backdrop, understanding the evolution of constitutional justice and personal liberty becomes imperative for policymakers, legal experts, and citizens alike.

Introduction
Understanding Constitutional Justice and Personal Liberty
Constitutional Provisions on Personal Liberty
Key Judicial Interpretations
Preventive Detention and Its Challenges
Contemporary Issues in Personal Liberty
The Role of Judiciary in Protecting Liberty
Comparative Analysis: India and Global Human Rights Standards
The Way Forward
Conclusion

Admission Open for PARIKSHA [UPSC Prelims Batch] Starts from 27th January 2025: https://bit.ly/4jciwCi

1. Introduction

The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, is hailed as one of the most comprehensive democratic frameworks globally. Over the past 75 years, the judiciary has played a crucial role in interpreting and expanding the ambit of fundamental rights, particularly personal liberty under Article 21. However, the state's power to curb liberty for national security reasons remains a subject of intense debate.

This blog delves deep into the historical evolution, judicial interpretations, legal challenges, and contemporary concerns surrounding personal liberty in India. We explore how constitutional safeguards have evolved, the role of the judiciary in protecting fundamental rights, and what more needs to be done to balance national security with personal freedoms.

2. Understanding Constitutional Justice and Personal Liberty

Constitutional justice refers to the judicial enforcement of fundamental rights and the application of constitutional principles to ensure fairness, equity, and legal consistency. Personal liberty, enshrined under Article 21, encompasses a broad range of rights including freedom from arbitrary detention, protection against state excesses, and the right to privacy.

Despite constitutional guarantees, personal liberty in India has been subjected to various restrictions through laws that enable preventive detention, sedition charges, and surveillance. The challenge lies in maintaining a fair balance between national security concerns and individual freedoms.

Daily Current Affairs available here: https://bit.ly/3C4SAYw

3. Constitutional Provisions on Personal Liberty

Article 21: Right to Life and Personal Liberty

Article 21 states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." While initially interpreted narrowly, subsequent judicial rulings have expanded its scope to include dignity, privacy, and due process.

Article 22: Protection Against Arbitrary Arrest

Article 22 provides safeguards against arbitrary detention and specifies procedural requirements in cases of preventive detention. However, it also permits detention without trial for up to three months under certain conditions.

Preventive Detention and Its Controversies

Preventive detention laws have been a subject of intense debate. Critics argue that these provisions are often misused to suppress dissent and target political opponents. While the state justifies them on grounds of national security, human rights activists demand stricter safeguards against abuse.

4. Key Judicial Interpretations

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

The Supreme Court upheld preventive detention, stating that "procedure established by law" meant any law enacted by the legislature, without requiring fairness or reasonability.
Justice S. Fazl Ali dissented, advocating broader liberty protections.

Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978):

Overruled A.K. Gopalan, ruling that personal liberty cannot be curtailed arbitrarily.
Introduced the Golden Triangle Doctrine (Articles 14, 19, 21), ensuring that laws curbing liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.

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

Declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21.
Strengthened personal liberty protections in the digital age.

5. Preventive Detention and Its Challenges

India’s preventive detention laws, including the National Security Act (NSA) and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), allow detention without trial for extended periods. Critics argue that these laws are frequently used for political vendettas rather than genuine security concerns. Several cases have highlighted the prolonged incarceration of activists and journalists under these laws.

6. Contemporary Issues in Personal Liberty

Use of Sedition Laws and UAPA: Misuse of sedition laws against journalists and activists has raised questions about free speech
Prolonged Detentions: Cases like Bhima Koregaon and CAA protests underscore concerns over extended judicial custody.
Digital Surveillance: The rise of Aadhaar-linked tracking and Pegasus spyware has sparked privacy debates.

7. The Role of Judiciary in Protecting Liberty

Judicial activism has played a crucial role in upholding personal liberty. The Supreme Court’s intervention in cases related to arbitrary arrests and surveillance has strengthened constitutional safeguards.

Conclusion

As India completes 75 years of constitutional democracy, personal liberty remains a cornerstone of governance. While security concerns exist, judicial oversight, civil society activism, and legal reforms are essential to maintaining a fair balance. Strengthening democratic institutions, ensuring judicial independence, and promoting legal literacy are vital steps toward protecting personal freedoms in the years to come.