Though there is a special legislation for the protection of human rights in
India it is true that the human rights jurisprudence developed and has been
developing by Indian Judiciary at its best and in great manner.
A Human right is not what someone gives you; it’s what no one take from you.
- Ramsey Clark
Human rights, as the term is most commonly used, are the rights that every human
being is entitled to enjoy and to have protected. This notion of Human Rights is
a gift of contemporary human thought to culture and civilization of the present
era as rightly said by Shirin Ebadi . Everyone knows that Human rights are
those rights which are essential for the survival of humans and their life,
but no one knows exact origin of concept of Human rights.
Simply an ordinary
prudent man says that the concept of human right began at the start of the
civilization on this earth. From the history and experts opinion at the
beginning of human history man struggled for his existence against nature (where
other man is also a part and parcel) and for protection, liberty and freedom.
More over the human being in order to live happily, needs rights to smooth
his/her life. This struggle paved the way to the concept of human rights. The
most unique feature of human rights is that it is difficult to define but
impossible to ignore. Human rights denote all those rights which are inherent in
our nature and without which humans can’t live. Human rights are commonly
understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simple
because she or he is a human being. These rights are indispensable for the
human dignity which they can enjoy from birth to death. Scott Davidson rightly
said that The concept of human rights is closely connected with the protection
of individuals from the exercise of State, Government or authority in certain
area of their lives, it is also directed towards creation of societal condition
by the state in which individual are to develop their fullest potential.
The concept of human rights is a dynamic concept, which one has to understand
basing on its basic aim that is Man is born to be free and all that he must do
is that be devoted to the wellbeing of human every kind of human being-of
whatever race or religion, caste or creed or whatever sex and in all societies,
developed and underdeveloped, traditional or modern. This truth this great
objective, belongs equally to everyone. This also sums up the basic objective of
human rights, which over the years has gained considerable importance in
international thinking and has been the subject of much discussion and debate in
recent times. These have been and still are, discussed in international platform
such as United Nations, more over in respective national parliaments, in the
media, and civil rights activities have been taking up the cause of emphasizing
the importance and implementation of human rights for a civilized and healthy
These necessary rights has been recognizing by world through several
ways like adopting UDHR 1948 and relative international conventions and making
separate legislations in respective countries and establishing human rights
commissions, human rights courts and observing international human rights day
etc. fortunately, India is also one of the country among these countries, which
has been taking several steps for promotion and protection of human rights in
India. Among these passing human rights Act, 1993 and more importantly it is
very important to understand the expansion of human rights through the enhanced
concept of Article 21 of the Indian constitution in recent times in India.
Though there is a special legislation for the protection of human rights in
India it is true that the human rights jurisprudence developed and has been
developing by Indian Judiciary at its best and in great manner.
Origin of Human rights concept
Many philosophers say that the notion of Human Rights is a gift of contemporary
human thought to culture and civilization, which one can witness in different
generations. The struggle to promote, protect and preserve human rights changes
and holds continuity in every generation in our society. But the concept and
practice of human rights is the hallmark of any modern society. Since time
immemorial, the story of human rights has been the story of human wrongs. It is
perhaps to contain and curtail the wrongs by one human being or a group or a
body of human beings against the other individual, or a group of beings against
the other, that the institutions like family to society as a whole come into
existence. The concept of human rights is a dynamic concept, which one has to
understand basing on its basic aim that is “Man is born to be free and all that
he must do is that be devoted to the wellbeing of human every kind of human
being-of whatever race or religion, caste or creed or whatever sex and in all
societies, developed and underdeveloped, traditional or modern”. This truth this
great objective, belongs equally to everyone.
Thus one can say that Human
rights are those rights which are essential for the survival of humans and their
life, but no one knows exact origin of concept of Human rights. In history
several events pawed the way for development of Human rights jurisprudence. In
539 BC, Cyrus the Great, after conquering the city of Babylon, did something
totally unexpected—he freed all slaves to return home. Moreover, he declared
people should choose their own religion. The Cyrus Cylinder, a clay tablet
containing his statements, is the first human rights declaration in
history. Later the idea of human rights spread quickly to India, Greece and
eventually Rome. Like above, though there were so many evidences about long
history regarding human rights all they are in ambiguous form. So, many writers
accepted that human rights concept can be best understood from the Magna Carta
in England (1215).
Later, the American Declaration of Independence (1776), which
proclaimed the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the French
Declaration on the Rights of man (1789), which is a document of France, stating
that all citizens are equal under the law, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia
(1917), could be cited as important landmarks in the development of the concept
of human rights and the U. N. Charter, 1945. Finally, the contemporary
international statement of human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights, which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 and
provided first document listing the 30 rights to which everyone is entitled.
Subsequently large number of international human right instruments and covenants
came into existence such as International Covenants of 1966 and 1976 i.e. Civil
and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. But this is
not the end the human rights jurisprudence has been extending along with human
development still do day.
DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA
The Indian constitution was drafted after the adoption of the universal
Declaration Human Rights (1948) by United Nations, but it was adopted at a time
when the deliberations for the Universal Deceleration were in air, so that the
framers of the Indian Constitution were influenced by the concept of human
rights, and they already guaranteed most of the human rights which later on
came to be embodied in the international covenant in 1966. In fact India was one
of the original signatories to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights and therefore the framers of Indian Constitution were influenced by the
concept of human right and recognised as well as guaranteed most of the human
rights which were subsequently embodied in the International Covenant 1966. It
is evident from preamble itself. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution
reflects the inspiring ideals with the specific mention of dignity of the
More over even prior to the framing of the constitution for free
India, Mahatma Gandhi had announced before the second round table
conference that his aim was to establish a political society in India in
which there would be no distinction between high and low class people, that
women should enjoy the same rights as men; and dignity and justice, social,
economic and political, would be ensured to the teeming millions of
India. This was one of the objects, which inspired Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru in
drafting the objectives resolution in the constituent assembly and which were
adopted on January 22, 1947. And this ideal of the objectives resolution was
reflected in the preamble of the constitution which was adopted in 26th November
1949 with the specific mention of dignity of the individual. It is thus evident
that during the period between 1946 and 1949 India had formulated the concept of
human rights and embodied in our constitution. Though the concept of human
rights spread in whole constitution like a golden thread, they were mainly
apparent in preamble, part III and part IV of the constitution. Later India took
a lead in this behalf and enacted Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993. This
Act besides other provisions provides for the creation of a National Human Right
COMPARITIVE STUDY OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER INDIA CONSTITUTION and RIGHTS
In order to appreciate the concept of human rights under Indian Constitution, it
is also pertinent to look to the aims and objects of the preamble, which are
indeed the aims and objects of Indian Constitution. The preamble reflects the
high purposes and noble objectives of the framers of the Constitution such as
Justice to all in case of social, economic and political field; Liberty of
thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and
opportunity, and to promote among them all; and Fraternity assuring the dignity
of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation, which are so
identical with aspirations of UDHR. In part III of the Indian constitution one
can evident some of identical rights, which are provided by UDHR, they are :
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
|Right to Life, liberty and security of person
|Prohibition of Slavery, slavery trade etc.
|Equality before law and non-discrimination
||Article14 and 15 (1)
|Right to effective remedy (Art. 8)
|Right against arbitrary arrest, detention
etc. (Art. 9)
|Right against ex-post factor Laws [Art.
||Article 20 (1)
|Right to freedom of movement [Art. 13(1)]
|Right to own property and not to be deprived
of property [Art. 17]
||Article19 (1) (f)
|Right to freedom of thought, conscience and
Religion (Art. 18)
||Article 25 (1)
|Right to freedom of opinion and expression
|Right to freedom of peaceful assembly and
Association [Art. 20 (1)]
|Right to equal access to public service [Art.
||Article 16 (1)
|Right to social security (Art. 22)
||Article 29 (1)
|Right to form and to join trade unions [Art.
Like above there are so many human rights expressly incorporated under Indian
Constitution by framers of the Indian constitution. But it would not be correct
to contend that the above human rights are the only rights incorporated in
Indian Constitution. Though, some human rights which do not find express mention
in the Constitution do exist impliedly. Indian judiciary through judicial
activism has been recognizing and interpreting constitutional provisions basing
on human rights especially under Article 21 red with article 226 or 32 of the
It is fact that now a day’s all over the world including in India, human rights
violations are very common to see, to hear and therefore the awareness among
individuals pertaining with their rights which are humanly recognized has
emerged as a potential discourse as far as development among the citizens are
concerned. And thus, it also on the other hand becomes very responsive role of
Judiciary that it should come into the action and perform its supportive role
for pronouncement up of the judgments regarding human rights into reality.
The strengthening of the judiciary is much required in context with human rights
as it would be accustomed to be the part of the Constitutional remedy which
would provide progressive efforts in the fields to evolve for the subject like
human rights which is protected by the law of the land i.e. The Constitution of
India. In regards to this in Section 30 of the Human Rights Protection Act 1993,
which enumerates us about the establishments of the human rights courts but the
offences arising out of the human rights violations have not been enumerates
under the Act.
It has been deduced that the states where the human rights courts are
established, made them functional. What is really happening is that issues which
are getting occurred due to gross human rights violations are mostly getting
punished under the criminal courts as considering the penal offence. Now the
things which should be taken into the account is that the offences which are
prescribed under the criminal law, must move towards the criminal courts and the
offences not mentioned under the law of crimes should be given a place under the
human rights courts as they too constitute the gross violations of the human
Constitutional remedy to human rights courts establishment
It becomes very necessitate that the article 32(3) of the Constitution can be
looked upon in regards with the enforcement of the human rights by the judiciary
or the functioning of the human rights courts in India, as it imparts that the
Parliament by law, can empower any other Courts except the Supreme Court, to
exercise with the local limits of the jurisdiction or any other power which has
been exercisable even by the Supreme Court, thus the section of Constitutional
remedy under the constitution of the India for securing the rights, becomes very
indispensable and which shall be known by each and every citizens of the India.
By this means, it would be possible to the other courts except the Supreme Court
of India, for providing with the remedies which are themselves engrossed with
the gross human rights violation have been taken place which will protect the
sufferer from getting violated his fundamental right as well as the rights which
has been inclusive of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the
India is signatory.
The several rights which are not been mentions specifically by the Constitution
of the India but has been proliferated under the wide ambit of the Article 21 of
the Constitution which enunciates us with many of the rights which includes as
Right to health, Right to food, Right to shelter, Right to live in a healthy
environment, Right to Livelihood, Right of Education, Right to privacy, Right
against Solitary confinement, speedy trial, legal aid and many more can be
classifies as those right which shall be enforced by the Human Rights Courts.
So, now it is important to now some of the land mark judicial pronouncements
regarding protection of human rights under fundamental rights perspective. From
Maneka Gandhi case, a number of progressive propositions were made to make
fundamental rights provided under Indian Constitution especially for Article 21
more meaningful by apex court and recognized so many human rights as fundamental
right under Article 21. Some of them are as follows:
a) Right to go abroad;
In Satwant Singh v. Assistant Passport officer, New Delhi, in Maneka
Gandhi v. Union of India15 apex court held that right to travel abroad was
part of a person’s liberty within the meaning of Art.21 and it should be
curtailed only basing on just, reasonable and fair legal ground. Court also held
that if there is a situation arose to curtail or limit it should be done only
after providing reasonable opportunity to person simply PNJ has to be followed.
Natural justice is a great humanizing principle intended to invest law with
fairness and to secure justice.
b) Right to live with human dignity;
Gandhi case the court gave a new dimension to Art.21 and held that the
tight to ‘live’ is not merely confined to physical existence but it includes
within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. And then elaborating the
same view the court in Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, held
that right to live is not restricted to mere animal existence. It means
something more than just physical survival. The right to ‘live’ 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 moving about and mixing and comingling with fellow human being.
Similarly, in Consumer Education and Research Centre & Ors. v. Union of India &
Ors, the Supreme Court was moved by human tragedy of modern industry;
economic waste and health hazards on account of occupational accidents and
diseases. The Supreme Court, while referring to a number of decisions, held that
the right to life with human dignity encompasses within its fold some of the
finer facets of human civilization which make life worth living. The right to
health for a worker is an integral facet of meaningful right to life to have not
only a meaningful existence, but also robust health and vigor, without which a
worker would lead a miserable life.
c) Right to get minimum wage for work;
In Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, court held
that non-payment of minimum wages to the workers employed was a denial of their
right to live with basic human dignity. Bhagawati, J speaking for the majority
held that the rights and benefits conferred on the workmen under various labour
laws are clearly intended to ensure basic human dignity to workmen and if the
workmen are deprived of any of these rights or benefits that would clearly be a
violation of basic human right and Art.21 also. For there In Deena v. Union of
India, in this case court held that the prisoners are entitled to payment of
reasonable wages for the work taken from them and the Court is under duty to
enforce their claim.
Like above court held that having minimum wage, the health and strength of the
worker is an integral facet of the right to life. Denial thereof deprives the
workman of the finer facets of life, violating Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the right to human dignity, development and
personality, social protection, and the right to rest and leisure are
fundamental human rights to a workman. These are assured by the Charter of Human
Rights, in the Preamble and Article 38 and 39 of the Constitution.
d) Right to Earn a Livelihood;
Tellis et. al. v. Bombay Municipal Corporation apex court held that the
question which we have to consider is whether the right to live includes the
right to livelihood. We see only one answer to that question, namely, that it
does. The sweep of the right of life conferred by Article 21 of the Constitution
is wide and far reaching. It does not mean merely that life cannot be
extinguished or taken away as, for example, by the imposition and execution of
the death sentence, except according to procedure established by law. That is
but one aspect of the right of life. An equally important facet of that right is
the right to livelihood, because no person can live without the means of living
– that is the means of livelihood. If the right to livelihood is not treated as
a part of livelihood to the point of abrogation, such deprivation would not only
denude the life of its effective content and meaningfulness, but it would make
life impossible to live. And yet, such deprivation would not have to be in
accordance with the procedure established by law, if the right to livelihood is
not regarded as a part of the right to life. That, which alone makes it possible
to live, leave aside what makes life livable, must be deemed to be an integral
component of the right to life. Deprive a person of his right to livelihood and
you shall have deprived him of his life.
e) Right to Health care or Doctor’s assistance;
In Parmanand Katara case court held that there can be no second opinion
that preservation of human life is of paramount importance. In case of accidents
injured should be given immediate medical aid to preserve life, and thereafter
the procedural criminal law should be allowed to operate in order to avoid
negligent deaths. That is so because once a life is lost, the status quo ante
cannot be restored, as resurrection is beyond the capacity of man. A doctor at
the Government hospital positioned to meet this State obligation is therefore
duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving life. Every doctor,
whether at a government hospital or otherwise has the professional obligation to
extend services with due expertise for protecting life. No law or State action
can intervene to avoid/delay the discharge of the paramount obligation cast upon
members of the medical profession. The obligation being total, absolute and
paramount, laws of procedure, whether in statutes or otherwise which would
interfere with the discharge of this obligation cannot be sustained and must,
therefore, give away. The Supreme Court had directed that this decision be
published in all journals and adequate publicity be given to it. Unfortunately,
even as of this date, a substantial number of doctors, hospitals, police
personnel and lay people are totally unaware of it.
f) Right against Handcuffing;
In Prem Shankar case Supreme Court held that “Handcuffing is prima facie
inhuman and, therefore, unreasonable, is over harsh and at the first flush,
arbitrary. Absent fair procedure and objective monitoring, to inflic ‘irons’ is
to resort to zoological strategies repugnant to Art. 21……”
g) Right Again Solitary Confinement;
In Sunit Batra (No. 1) v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court held
that even a prisoner has liberty to move, mix, mingle, talk, share company with
co-prisoners it should not be curtailed without proper law. If in the name of
solitary confinement there is total deprivation of friendship amongst
co-prisoners coming and taking and being talked to, it would offend basic human
right and violative of Art.21.
h) Non-citizens also entitled to right to life
In a landmark judgment in National Human Rights Commission v. State of
Arunachal Pradesh, the highest court of India held that the State is
bound to protect the life and liberty of every human being whether they are
citizen or non-citizens.
i) Right to education
In Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, their Lordships declared that
unless there is right to education a person cannot enjoy the fundamental right
to speech and expression in full so the education in India has never been a
commodity for sale. Later in Unnikrishnan
Case court declared that the children of the age of 6 to 14 have right
to education as fundamental right. After that by 86th Amendment Act, 2002
Art.21A was inserted to made education for all children of the age of 6 to 14 as
free and compulsory.
The above list is simply illustrative and by no means exhaustive. There are so
many other issues which are so connected with human rights recognized by Indian
judiciary as fundamental rights.
They are as follows:
j) Right to Privacy;
k) Right Against Bar Fetters;
l) Right to free legal Aid in criminal trial;
m) Right to Speedy Trial;
n) Right Against delayed execution;
o) Right Against custodial violence;
p) Right Against Public Hanging;
q) Right to shelter;
r) Right to know;
s) Right to compensation;
t) Right to Release and Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour;
u) Right Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment;
v) Right to food and water;
w) Right to have clean, green and pollution free environment;
x) Right of Inmates of Protective Homes. And many more …………….
Besides, the declaration of above human rights within the expanding ambit of
fundamental rights especially Article 21, Judiciary applied fundamental rights
by taking in to consideration of human rights in various fields such as Drugs;
Hazardous Chemicals; Insane Persons; Passports; Atomic Energy Radiation; Forests
Like above Indian judiciary has been recognizing numerous human rights by
enhancing the scope of fundamental rights to proved and promote justice to
people. In fact the fundamental rights rights under Art.21 are greater than that
of UDHR, Why because there is a doubt regarding binding nature of UDHR
proclamation. Unlike the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Fundamental
Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution are not only binding, they are
also enforceable through the Courts of law that to Art.21 cannot be suspended
even during emergency.
More over human Rights in Indian Constitution can be found in the Preamble of
the Constitution of India, Part III of the Constitution on Fundamental Rights
and Part IV of the Constitution on Directive Principles, which together have
been described as forming the core of the Constitution which together reflect
the basic principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the
Covenants on Civil and Political Rights, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
and Part IVA of the Constitution on Fundamental Duties, Articles 300A,325 and
Human rights courts in India
Here it is worthwhile to deal about establishment of special human rights courts
through the human rights Act 1993. Though this Act enacted with several
objectives to achieve among all those one should specifically talk about as
mentioned in the preamble is in regards with the establishment up of Human
Rights Courts at the District Level, as from the base line as well as each and
every court will be having its jurisdiction to work upon, thus providing with
the great caliber for the protection up of the Human Rights.
The object so mentioned in the preamble of this act for the building up of the
courts at the district level to ensue for the speedy function of the cases where
the matter is being in relation of the suffering of human rights violations and
gets its decision without being getting delayed in any form. As been prescribed
under the Act of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (Chapter 6, Section
30) says that for the purpose of providing speedy trial to the cases involving
Human Rights issues, the State Government may, with the concurrence of the Chief
Justice of India of the High Court, and specifying in each district a court of
session or it can be said a Human Rights Court to try the cases pertaining to
the field of only and only Human rights.
Special public prosecutor for the Human Rights courts
The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, section 31- emphasis upon for the
appointment of the Special Prosecutor for the Human Rights Court to be appointed
by the State Government, who would be acting as an advocate who have been in the
practice for not less than 7 years.
Such Courts have been established in many states which are inclusive of Andhra
Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Sikkim, Uttar Pradesh, Assam etc. And many other are
getting into the process to be done in regards of the same.
Human Rights Court, when gets established will surely be having the status of a
Court to adjudicate the justice for the Human Rights issues, and thus would be
different body from the Human Rights Commission whether National or the State
level, as the work which Court plays is differentiated from the Human Rights
From the above one can understand that in India, every Legal Right would be
considered as Human Right, as meant for their own interests of protection and
somewhere or the other for the promotion, but each and every right, which should
be humanly recognized have not been still tagged with the assistance of Legal
It is very well known by everyone that Law takes steady and gradual time period
to evolve itself and coming up with its perfect version, as well as it should
also be noted that Law follows a sequence or a consequence to be get evolved as
well as for more of its proper interpretation it requires full proof measures as
well as arguments put forth for its evolved form to get enforced.
Hence, it should be understood that because of the above mentioned principle, it
may not always be possible to implement of codify all the requisite or the
probable laws to get formulated or anticipated in the manner for the protection
up of the Human Rights, and thus the role of our Indian Judiciary comes into the
existence when it is enumerated about the principles of natural justice as due
process of Law will govern and adjudicate for the protection and promotion of
the rights of the people when they have suffered violations of the their rights
and when to protect it no legislation has been framed, Thus Judiciary in this
way don’t let anybody’s rights get infringed, rather protects them taking the
issuance of the principles of natural justice.
Thus, it becomes a very implicit fact that rights which are humanely recognized
makes up the base for any legislation to get framed in the country like India,
as it becomes the duty of Judiciary or more specifically the Judges to
understand the issues and provide for the enforcement of the rights for the well
– being of the society.
Scope for extraordinary role by district judiciary
The District Judiciary provides for an effective role in adjudicating the
Justice, as it would be a very big and huge responsibility for the Human Rights
Courts for protecting up of the Rights which either by guaranteed by the
Constitution of India or by any other specific statute incorporated by the
India. Matters for the entertaining up of the application and its interpretation
of the clauses like of Article 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India, in such
cases would be looked up by the District Judicial Officer.
The point which is needed here to be understood that these Human Rights issues
if got separated will be providing effectiveness in the working procedural
functioning to the Courts as well as by adjudicating the cases of Human Rights
provide for the great potential to solve as many as cases of the Human Rights in
Finally, it would not be wrong to say that the violation of human rights can be
controlled only when there is a firm determination for the human dignity and
values. It is equally important that the Indian society at large, including the
political elite, both civil and police administration, the media, NGOs, civil
society and intellectuals who yield influence in moulding the opinion in the
society should have proper approach and attitude towards the protection of human
rights. Each and every one in the society has the role to play an important role
in securing human rights of the people.
There can be no peace without development, no development without peace, and
no lasting peace or sustainable development without respect for human rights and
the rule of law. – UN Deputy Secretary- General Jan Eliasson
 Available at : http://www.wiseoldsayings.com/human-rights-quotes/
 “Human rights is a universal standard. It is a component of every religion
and every civilization”- Shirini Ebadi. available at : https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/shirin_ebadi
Shirin Ebadi is an Iranian lawyer, a former judge and human rights activist and
founder of Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran. For more details see
 Senapati Tushar Kanti, “Human Rights and Dalits in India: A Sociological
Analysis”, Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar,
Odisha, INDIA. Published in International Research Journal of Social Sciences
Vol. 3(3), 36-40, March (2014). Available online at: www.isca.in, www.isca.me
 Available online at : http://www.youthforhumanrights.org/what-are-human-rights/background-of-human-rights.html
 For more detailed study about historical evolution of human rights.
Available at : http://www.humanrights.com.
 K.P. Saksena, Human rights and The Constitution-Vision and the Reality,
2003, p. 29-30.
 D.D., Basu , Human Rights in Constitutional Law, 2008, p. 16
 Chapter 3- Directive Principles, 3.25.8. available online at: Ministry of
Law and Justice website-lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v1ch3.htm
 C.J. Nirmal, Human Rights in India-A historical, social and political
perspectives, 2000, p. 289-291.
 C.J. Nirmal, Human Rights in India-A historical, social and political
perspectives, 2000, p. 291-310.
 Abdulrahim P. Vijapur, The United Nations at fifty, Studies in Human
Rights, 1996, p.197- 201.
 This fundamental right from Indian constitution was omitted by the
constitution (44 Amendment) Act, 1978
 Maneka Gandhi v. UOI and others, AIR 1978 SC 597
 Satwant Singh v. Assistant Passport officer, New Delhi, AIR 1967 SC 1836.
 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
 Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746.
 Consumer Education and Research Centre & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors AIR
1995 SC 922
 Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473.
 Deena v. Union of India, AIR 1983 SC 1155.
 Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corportion (AIR 1986 SC 180)
 Parmanaand Katr v. Union of India SCC 1989 (4) p. 286
 Prem Shankar v Delhi Administration, AIR 1980 SC 1535.
 Sunil Batra v. Delhi Adm. (1 1978 SC. 1675), Sher Singh v. State of Punjab,
AIR 1983 SC
 National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 1996 1 SCC
 Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka,1992 (3) SCC 666
 Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P., 1993 (1) SCC 645.
 R. Rajagopa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1994 (6) SCC 632. And PUCL v. Union of
India, AIR 1997 SC 568.
 Charles Shobraj v. Supp. Central Jail 1979.
 Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1978 SC 1548 . Hussain Arra v. Home
secretary AIR 1979 SC 1369, Sukhdas v. arunachal Pradesh , AIR 1986 SC 991.
 State of H.P. v. Raja Mahindra Pal, AIR 1999 SC 1786.
 Jved Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra , AIR 1985 SC 231
 Sheela v. Union of India , AIR 1986 SC 1773
 AG of India v. Lachma Devi, AIR 1985 SC 467
 Chameli Singh v. State of UP, AIR 1996 SC 1051.
 Doon Valley Case (AIR 1985 SC 652), M. C. Mehta v. Union of India (AIR 1988
SC 1037), Oleum Gas Leak Case (AIR 1986 SC)
 Available online at : http://unfoundationblog.org/11-top-quotes-on-human-rights/
Written By Dr. Koneru Anuradha, Assistant Professor in Law, SVD
Siddhartha Law College,
Kanuru, Vijayawada, Krishna DT, AP State, India. Pin code: 52007.
Email: [email protected]