21.Protection of life and personal liberty:

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

COMMENTS

This right is available to the citizen as well as non-citizens. In the famous Gopalan case , ‘personal liberty ‘ was held to mean freedom relating to or concerning the person or body of the individual, It has been extended to right to livelihood. Right to live involves the right to live with human dignity. In case popularly known as the Pavement Dwellers case, the word ‘life’ in Article included the right to livelihood.

Imprisonment of a poor person for non-payment of debts amounted to shortage of his personal liberty.

Provision of guarantee of 100 or 150 day employment to every household on demand in a year under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 is also a part of right to livelihood provided a person asking for the work and is wishing to work on the scheme. This is a revolutionary step. Naturally non should expect to eat without working. Similarly , the National Food Security Act, 2013 is a guarantee to the poor in India against starvation. However, implementation of these schemes is also subject to judicial review because a law without implementation is just a dry piece of paper which serves no reason . Earlier, the supreme court had held that non-payment of minimum wages to the workers amounted to denial of their right to live with basic human dignity and violated Article 21. Similarly, under the Bonded Labour System (Abolition)Act, 1976, it is not enough merely to identify and release bonded labourers but it is more the plainest requirement of Article 21.In Maneka Gandhi case, the supreme court held that the right to life under Article 21 means more than survival or animal existence and would include the right to live with human dignity.

21A.Right to education:

The State shall give free and compulsory education to all children of the age six to fourteen years in such manner as the state may, determine.

COMMENTS

The new Article for free and compulsory education for all children between the age of 6 to 14 years. This will ensure awareness among public when these children grow up .The compulsory education at primary education is considered panacea for the country. But its implement should be done sincerely. The Supreme Court has commented that ‘the total indifferent of the government authorities is leading to the violation of the fundamental rights of the children” However one has to wait for some time for its proper execution. It took more than sixty years which is basic foundation for the progress of the nation.”The right of a child should be extended to have quality education without discrimination on the ground of child’s social, economic and cultural background.” It is heartening to know that even private English medium schools are allowing children from economically weaker section of society to be admitted for primary education.

The Right of Children to free and compulsory Education Act, 2009 entitles child to free and education in neighbour hood unaided school for education in the age group of 6 to 14 should also be accountable by law to be made by parliament or State Legislatures.

22.Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases:

(1) No person who is arrested shall be determined in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest nor shall he be denied the right to consult, and to be defended by, a legal practitioner of his choice.

(2) Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest, excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate and no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a magistrate.

(3) Nothing in clauses (1) and (2) shall apply – (a) to any person who for the time being is an enemy alien; or (b) to any person who is arrested or detained under any law providing for preventive detention.

(4) No law providing for preventive detention shall authorize the detention of a person for a longer period than three months unless an Advisory Board constituted in accordance with the recommendations of the Chief Justice of the appropriate High Court has reported before the expiration of the said period of two months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention: provided that an Advisory Board shall consists of a Chairman and not less than two other members, and the Chairman shall be a serving Judge of the appropriate High Court and other members shall be serving or retired Judges of any High Court : Provided further that nothing in this clause shall authorize the detention of any person beyond the maximum period prescribed by any law made by Parliament under sub-clause (b) of clause (7).