The Meaning of ‘Life’ under the Indian Constitution
B
‘Life’ as Encompassing the Obligation Not to Render Persons Stateless
In light of the above description of the situation of statelessness, this section
examines the meaning of life under art 21 of the Constitution vis-à-vis the
obligation not to render persons stateless. Article 21 states: ‘No person shall be
deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established
by law’. 75 Indians courts have adopted a liberal construction of this right and have
included within the meaning of ‘life’, several civil, political and social rights
contained in human rights treaties and conventions. 76 These rights have been
included as part of ‘life’, as the Supreme Court of India has interpreted ‘life’ to
mean a dignified life. 77 The Court recognised that the right to life ‘includes the
right to live with human dignity … the right to the basic necessities of life and also
the right to carry on such functions and activities as constitute the bare minimum
expression of the human self’. 78 The Court considers that ‘without the right to life
with dignity other fundamental rights may not realise their complete meaning’. 79
So, ‘life’ interpreted as dignified life includes all rights that are required to live as
a human being. The Supreme Court has recognised that the protection of such
dignified life of non-citizens as the State’s obligation. 80
What does this dignified life mean? As elaborated by the Supreme Court, the
right to life includes human dignity, 81 the right to livelihood, 82 the right to health, 83
the right to medical care, 84 the right to speedy trial, 85 the right to be recognised as
a person before law, 86 the right against torture, 87 the right against solitary
confinement, 88 right to culture, 89 the right to social justice, 90 the right to
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
Constitution (n 1) art 21.
See M P Jain, Indian Constitutional Law (8th ed, Lexis Nexis 2018) 2249–50. See also Navtej
Singh Johar v Union of India (2018) WP(C) 76 of 2016 (Supreme Court of India) [420]–[430]
(Dr DY Chandrachud J) (‘Navtej Singh’).
See Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India (1984) 3 SCC 161 (Supreme Court of India)
[10]. See also In Re: Noise Pollution (V) (2005) 5 SCC 733 (Supreme Court of India) [10].
Francis Coralie Mullin v Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981) SCR (2) 516
(Supreme Court of India) [8] (Bhagwati J) (‘Francis Coralie’).
Navtej Singh (n 76) [127].
Chairman, Railway Board v Chandrima Das (2000) 2 SCC 465 (Supreme Court of India)
[32] (‘Chandrima Das’).
Maneka Gandhi v Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 (Supreme Court of India) [85] (‘Maneka
Gandhi’).
Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) 3 SCC 545 (Supreme Court of India)
[32].
Calcutta Electricity Supply Corporation (India) Ltd v Subhash Chandra Bose (1992) 1 SCC
441 (Supreme Court of India) [30] (‘Calcutta Electricity Supply Corporation’).
Paschim Bangal Khet Mazdoor Samity v State of West Bengal (1996) 4 SCC 37 (Supreme
Court of India) [9].
Hussainara v Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna (1980) 1 SCC 98 (Supreme Court of
India) [10].
National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v Union of India (2014) 5 SCC 438 (Supreme
Court of India) [75]–[80] (‘NALSA’).
Francis Coralie (n 78) [8].
Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration (1978) 4 SCC 494 (Supreme Court of India) [192]–[193].
Ramsharan Autyanuprasi v Union of India (1989) Supp (1) SCC 251 (Supreme Court of
India) [13].
Calcutta Electricity Supply Corporation (n 83) [30].
197