Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
CourtSupreme Court of India
Full case nameManeka Gandhi v. Union of India (UOI).
Decided1978
Citation(s)AIR 1978 SC 597; (1978) 1 SCC 248
Court membership
Judges sittingM. H. Beg (Chief Justice), Y. V. Chandrachud, V. R. Krishna Iyer, P. N. Bhagwati, N. L. Untwalia, S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, P. S. Kailasam
Case opinions
Decision byP. N. Bhagwati (for himself, N.L. Untwalia, and S.M. Fazal Ali)
ConcurrenceM. H. Beg (Chief Justice), Y. V. Chandrachud, V. R. Krishna Iyer
DissentPalapatti Sadaya Goundar Kailasam
Laws applied
This case overturned a previous ruling
A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras by Supreme Court of India

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It overruled A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, which had implied the exclusiveness of fundamental rights, and established a relationship between Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution (known as the 'golden triangle' or 'trinity'),[1]: 222  holding that a law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of them.[1]: 220  Once again overruling A. K. Gopalan, the Court in this case held that a 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable.[1]: 220 

The decision had a significant influence on Indian constitutional law and has been described as the moment when the Supreme Court of India rejected "three decades of formalist interpretation, and inaugurated a new path where Courts would expand the rights of individuals against the State, instead of limiting or contracting them."[2]

Background

Maneka Gandhi's passport was impounded 'in the public interest' by an order dated 2 July 1977.[3]: 273  When reasons for impounding her passport was sought, the Government of India declined to provide any "in the interests of the general public."[3]: 273 

Gandhi filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order on the grounds that it violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The Union responded in their written submissions that her passport was impounded because her presence was likely to be required in connection with legal proceedings before a 'Commission of Inquiry'.

Judgement

Justice P. N. Bhagwati delivered a judgment for a plurality of the Court, writing for himself and Justices Untwalia and Fazal Ali.[3]: 273  Chief Justice Beg,[3]: 390  Justice Chandrachud,[3]: 322  and Justice Krishna Iyer wrote separate judgments concurring with the plurality.[3]: 328 

Justice Kailasam wrote a dissenting opinion.[3]: 350 

The Court did not pass an order on the specific matter of Maneka Gandhi's passport, writing that "[i]n view of the statement made by the Attorney-General that the Government is agreeable to consider any representation that may be made by the petitioner in respect of impounding of her passport . . . it is not necessary to formally interfere with the impugned order..."[3]: 322 

References

  1. ^ a b c Singh, Mahendra Pal (2019). V. N. Shukla's Constitution of India (13th ed.). Eastern Book Company. ISBN 978-9388822213.
  2. ^ Bhatia, Gautam (9 September 2017). "The Supreme Court's Right to Privacy Judgment – X: Conclusion: The Proof of the Pudding". Indian Constitutional Law and Philosophy. Retrieved 18 May 2021.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g h Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, 1 SCC 248 (Supreme Court of India 1978).
This article needs additional or more specific categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (June 2023)
Categories