Here are 20 landmark judgments on Article 22 of the Indian Constitution from both the Supreme Court and High Courts:
Supreme Court
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): The Supreme Court held that the right to personal liberty under Article 21 includes the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest and the right to consult a legal practitioner.
Jayanarayan Sukul v. State of West Bengal (1970): The Supreme Court ruled that the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is a fundamental right under Article 22(1).
Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1994): The Supreme Court emphasized that no person can be arrested without informing the grounds for arrest and that the arrested person must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours.
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997): The Supreme Court laid down guidelines to prevent custodial torture and ensure the protection of human rights under Article 22.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014): The Supreme Court criticized the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC and emphasized the importance of following the guidelines laid down in the D.K. Basu case.
Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983): The Supreme Court held that the right to consult a legal practitioner is a fundamental right under Article 22(1).
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979): The Supreme Court ruled that the right to a speedy trial is an integral part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993): The Supreme Court awarded compensation to the family of a person who died in police custody, emphasizing the importance of protecting human rights.
Prabir Purkayastha v. State NCT of Delhi (2024): The Supreme Court reinforced the constitutional right of an accused under Article 22 to receive written grounds for their arrest.
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Abdul Samad (1962): The Supreme Court held that the right to be informed of the grounds of arrest is a fundamental right under Article 22(1).
High Courts
State of Gujarat v. Gurbachan Singh (1976): The Gujarat High Court dealt with the issue of preventive detention and the applicability of Article 22.
State of Maharashtra v. Narasu Appa Mali (1959): The Bombay High Court held that preventive detention laws could not be challenged on the grounds of violating fundamental rights, including Article 22.
State of Andhra Pradesh v. P. Venkata Reddy (1963): The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that the principle of double jeopardy under Article 20(2) does not apply to cases where the same act constitutes multiple offenses under different statutes.
State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1976): The Calcutta High Court addressed the issue of discrimination and the application of Article 14 in conjunction with Article 22.
State of Gujarat v. Ramanlal K. Patel (1967): The Gujarat High Court held that the principle of ex-post facto laws under Article 20(1) applies only to criminal laws and not to civil laws.
These cases reflect the judiciary's efforts to uphold the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution and to adapt to the changing needs of society.
No comments:
Post a Comment