Article 21 as a Living Constitution Doctrine: From Minimalism to Transformative Justice

Abstract

Article 21 of the Constitution of India has undergone a remarkable change in its scope, being regarded as the most dynamic and flexible article of Indian constitutional law. It was initially interpreted in a narrow and procedural sense in the landmark case of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, where the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 was confined merely to the requirement of a procedure prescribed by law, without much judicial scrutiny into the justice of such procedures. The following phase of development emerged in the well-known case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, where it was stated by the Supreme Court that every procedure that amounts to depriving an individual of life and personal liberty shall invariably be “just, fair, and reasonable.” This paper explores the development of the doctrine of substantive due process under the Indian Constitution. Article 21 has widened through time and includes rights such as livelihood, health, education, environment, privacy, and access to justice, and it provides for consistency between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy. Article 21 expands on the basis of human dignity. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the Court held that privacy is essential to individual freedom. The paper reviews the role of the judiciary in the process of transformative constitutionalism through purposive interpretation. In the era of technological development, Article 21 has undergone further change in the light of new challenges such as technological surveillance and data protection, addressed through the principles of legality, necessity, and proportionality. Although some reservations about judicial activism persist, Article 21 continues to widen owing to the revolutionary nature of the Constitution.