Table of Content:-
- Introduction
- The Right to Life under the International Human Rights Instrument
- The Right to Life under constitutional framework
- Judicial Interpretation and Expansion - Derivative rights recognized under Article 21
- Legislative provisions supporting Right to life in India
- Scholars' view on the Right to life as a Human Right
- Challenges and concerns.
- Conclusion
- Reference
List of Cases:-
The following cases are discussed in this article -
i. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27
ii. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
iii. Olga Tallis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180
iv. Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802
v. Subhas Kumar v. State of Bihar, 1991 AIR 420 1991 SCR
vi. Common Cause v. Union of India, 5 SCC 1
vii. K. S, Puttaswamy v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4161
viii. Keshvananda Bharti v. state of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461
ix. Kharak Singh v. State of U.P. 1963 AIR 1295
x. Chameli Singh v. State of U.P,AIR 1996 SC 1051
xi. Paschim Bengal Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1996 SC 2426
xii. Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, 1992 AIR SC 1858
xiii. M.C Mehta Case, 1987 AIR 1086
xiv. Surjit Singh Thind v. Kanwaljit Kaur, AIR2003 P&H 353
xv. Rayala M. Bhuvaneshwar v. Nagaphanender Rayala, AIR 2008 AP 98
xvi. Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, 1981 AIR SC 746
xvii. Sanchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration, AIR 2010 SC 235
xviii. Jagat Ram Sahni v. Union of India, AIR 2021 SC 523,
xix. Ramlila Maidan v. Home Secretary, Union of India, 2012 AIR SCW 3660
xx. Jolly George Varghese v. Bank of Cochin, 1980 AIR SC 470.
Right to Life as a Human Rights
Introduction:-
The Right to life is one of the most fundamental human rights recognized as the cornerstone of all other rights. It is a right that guarantees Protection against arbitrary deprivation of life and obligates the States to safeguard and enhance the life and dignity of individuals. This article seeks to explore the right to life as a human right from international and national perspective, its scope and development through legislative framework and judicial interpretation, particularly in the Indian context.
The Right to Life under International Human Rights Instruments
There are various International Covenants that deal with the Right to life and set it as a human Right.
Some of these historical texts are:-
a) Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (UDHR), 1948
Article 3 of UDHR, 1948 states "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and Security of person".
These provisions laid the moral foundation for modern human rights. Though not legally binding, it provides. The philosophical and ethical basis for binding treaties. The inherent dignity of human beings requires the Protection of life above all else.
b) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966
Article 6 of ICCPR, 1966 states, "Every human being has the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law".
Recognizing life as "inherent" implies its non-negotiable nature. Being a ratified treaty for India, it obligates domestic laws and policies to protect these rights, making it a legally enforceable norm.
c) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989
Article 6 of CRC, 1989 States "States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life. and States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child."
This elevates the right to life & not only as a survival right but as one tied with holistic human development, emphasizing its dynamic nature.
d) European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), 1950
Article 2 of the ECHR, 1950 states "Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law."
The Strict Conditions under which life can be taken affirm the sanctity of life and reflect a universal human rights Standard.
e) African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR), 1981
Article 4 of ACHPR, 1981 states, “Human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the integrity of his person. No one may be arbitrarily deprived of this right.”
This reinforces the notion that life is beyond the Control of state arbitrariness, further grounding it in the framework of dignity.
The Right to life under the Indian Constitutional framework.
Article 21 of the Constitution of India: "No Person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law."
The Constitutional framers placed Article 21 in Part III of (fundamental rights), establishing its primacy. The evolution. Through judicial interpretation, it has extended its scope dramatically.
In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras,1950, the Supreme Court interpreted Article 21 very narrowly in this case. It was the groundwork for future debates on procedural fairness. This case limits the word "personal liberty" to only physical movement and rejects the contention of “due process of law.”
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India,1978, the Supreme Court widely interpreted the ambit of Article 21. This case introduced the idea that any law interfering with life must be just, fair, and reasonable. This linked Indian law with the “due process” principle of American jurisprudence. This Case adopted the contention of "due process of law,” which was earlier rejected in A.K. Gopalan. v. State of Madras. This case further widened the scope of judicial review, and many new rights were derived by interpreting Article 21.
In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation,1985, the Supreme Court established that means of livelihood are integral to life, removing someone's livelihood is akin to depriving them of life.
In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India,1984, the Supreme Court extended Article 21 to include humane working Conditions, free from exploitation, bringing life to socio-economic justice.
In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar,1991, the Supreme Court affirmed environmental quality as essential to life, leading to the development of environmental jurisprudence under Article 21.
In Common Cause v. Union of India,2018, the Supreme Court recognized that life includes dignity in death. The right to die with dignity is part of the continuum of the right to live with dignity.
Justice Dy. Chandrachud in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India,2017, States that Natural rights are inalienable because they are inseparable from human personality. Neither life nor liberties are bounties conferred by the State nor does the Constitution create these rights. In recognizing rights, Constitution does not become the sole repository of rights.
He also held that the right to life is alienable to each individual, it existed even before the advent of the Constitution and continued in force under Article 372 of the Constitution.
In Keshvananda Bharti V. State of Kerala,1973, these Natural rights were held as primordial rights, and rights under Article 21 were held as Natural rights.
In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union Of India,2017, Justice. D.Y. Chandrachud further held that the Human element in life is impossible to conceive without the existence of natural rights. Sights and integrally founded on the Sanctity of life. Dignity is associated with liberty and freedom. No civilized Society can contemplate an encroachment upon life and personal liberty without the authority of law.
In Kharak Singh v. State of U.P,1963, the Supreme Court held that the term life is not limited to bodily restraint or confinement to prison only but something more than mere animal existence.
In all the above-mentioned cases, the Supreme Court found the Right to life as the most basic and primordial right and in the absence of which human life doesn’t have any existence.
Derivative Right Recognized under Article 21.
After many interpretations by the Hon'ble apex court, in various cases, many rights were derived from Article 21, which also recognizes the Right to life as a human right.
i. Right to Privacy:- Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) Vs. Union of India (2017):-
Privacy is intrinsic to autonomy, and autonomy is central to life and dignity.
ii. Right to shelter:- Chameli Singh v. State of U.P (1996):-
A house provides not just Shelter but dignity, safety, and identity essential for human life.
iii. Right to Health and Medical Care:- Paschim Bengal Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengal (1996):-
The state's failure to provide emergency healthcare violates the right to life.
iv. Right to education:- Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (1992):-
Education enables individuals to lead a meaningful life, making it a tool for realizing life's full potential.
v. Right to clean environment:- M.C. Mehta case (1986):-
Environmental degradation impacts survival, hence. Violates the right to life
vi. Right to Privacy and Virginity Text:- Surjit Singh Thind vs. Kanwaljit Kaur (2003):-
Allowing the medical examination of a woman's virginity violates her right to privacy under Article 21.
vii. Telephone – Tapping:- Rayala M. Bhuvaneswari v. Nagaphanender Rayola (2007):-
The act of tapping the Conversation of the wife with another, by her husband, without her knowledge, was illegal and amounted to an infringement of her right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
viii. Right to live with human dignity:- Francis Coralie v. Union territory of Delhi (1981):-
The right to 'life' is not confined to the protection of any faculty or limb through which life is enjoyed or the soul Communicates with the outside world but it also includes "the right to live with human dignity, and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing and expressing ourselves in diverse forms, freely morning about and mixing and commingling with fellow human beings.
ix. Right of women to produce a Child or refuse to participate in the sexual act:- Suchitra Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2010):-
A woman has the right of choice to have personal liberty as understood under Article 21. There should be no restriction on the exercise of reproductive choice.
x. Supply of nutritious food:- Jagatram Sahni v. Union of India (2021):-
It is the statutory obligation of the Centre and the states to provide nutritional support to pregnant women and lactating mothers, nutritional support to Children, and to take steps to identify and provide meals for Children who suffer from malnutrition.
xi. Right to Steep:- In Ramlila Maidan v. Home Secretary, Union of India (2012):-
Sleep is a necessity and not a luxury. The right to Privacy and the Right to sleep have always been treated to be fundamental rights like a right to breathe, eat, drink, to blink etc.
xii. Arrest and detention of a judgment-debtor:- Jolly George Varghese v. Bank of Cochin (1980):-
The arrest and detention of an honest Judgment-debtor in civil prison, who has no means to pay the debt In absence of mala fide and dishonesty, violates Article 11 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
All of the above-mentioned cases are examples of how the Hon'ble Supreme Court interpreted Article 21 of the Constitution in light of Human Rights and show the integrity of the Right to life as a Human right.
Legislative Provisions Supporting the Right to Life in India.
There are various legislative provisions that support the Right to Life as a human Right
a) Protection of Human Rights Act, 1983.
Statutorily reinforces that human rights include life, liberty, equality, and dignity by bridging the gap between international obligations and domestic enforcement.
b) Environmental Protection Act, 1986.
Environmental Protection is essential to secure a healthy life, making this act a legislative tool to protect Article 21.
c) Labour and social welfare laws (Factories Act, Minimum Wages Act, Maternity Benefit Act)
These acts ensure minimum standards for health, safety, and economic Security, integral to a dignified life.
Scholars' view on Human Rights and the Right to Life.
"The most resonant and beautiful words of any international agreement. "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights"
-Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein. (UN High Commissioner for Human Rights).
"The most sacred laws of justice are the laws which guard. the life and person of our neighbor"
-Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments.
“Life is the great civil rights issue of our day".
-Jack Cashill
"The commitment of the United Nations to human rights. Stems from the organization's founding charter The International community must uphold and defend these rights.”
-BAN Ki-moon, (Secretary-General, United Nations)
Challenges and Concerns.-
Despite strong legal frameworks and judicial interventions, real-world challenges, like custodial deaths, lack of access to healthcare, and environmental harm, show gaps in enforcement. Addressing these is crucial for the full realization of the right to life.
Conclusion
The right to life is the foundation upon which all other human rights stand. It is not merely the right to animal existence but to live with dignity, Security, and equality. Both the International Covenant and the Indian Constitution have progressively broadened the Scope of this right. The Indian judiciary, through expansive interpretations, has made it the most enriched and powerful tool for ensuring social justice and upholding human dignity. However, Persistent efforts. Are needed to address violations and ensure its full realization for every individual, in letter and spirit.
Reference
For the completion of this Article, I took help from the following sources.-
- JN Pandey, Constitutional Law of India (Central Law Agency [latest edition year if known])
- Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, s 2(d)
- Constitution of India 1950, Art 21
- Charter of the United Nations (adopted 26 June 1945, entered into force 24 October 1945) 1 UNTS XVI
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948 UNGA Res 217 A(III)) art 3
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171, art 6.
- Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3, art 6.
- European Convention on Human Rights (adopted 4 November 1950, entered into force 3 September 1953) 213 UNTS 221, art 2.
- African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (adopted 27 June 1981, entered into force 21 October 1986) 1520 UNTS 217, art 4
- https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/night-to-life accessed 16 April 2025
- www.manupatraacedmy.in accessed 16 April 2025.