Analysis on the Habeas corpus case

Karthik.T | Sastra Deemed University Thanjavur | 29th June 2020

K.S. PUTTASWAMY V. UNION OF INDIA

FACTS:

This was a landmark judgment by the Supreme Court. The facts of this case are that the first Indra Gandhi election has been challenged in Allahabad High court that Indra Gandhi used unlawful practices to win this election.

She was the prime minister at that time and to keep the post of the prime minister she ordered the President of India to impose National Emergency in the country. As the emergency has been declared under section 359(1) of the Indian Constitution and an order issued by the central government that at the time of emergency Article 14,21 and 22 will be suspended. So many of the citizens had been unlawfully detained and they have been jailed because they opposed the move of the Prime Minister. This resulted in the filing of Writ of Habeas Corpus to the High Court under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to release everyone who is unlawfully detained. The high Court releases every one and this has been opposed by the state and they filed a petition in Supreme Court Challenging the order of the high court.

ISSUES:

Whether during the time of National Emergency can a Writ of Habeas Corpus is maintainable in the court of law.

PETITIONER CONTENTION:

The petitioner contended that at the time of National Emergency no one has the right to question the order of the President as article 359 is a special power that can not be questioned in any of the courts. Further, when a person has been detained at the time of emergency it could not be challenged in the court of law that it was unlawful.

RESPONDENT CONTENTION:

The respondent contended that the presidential order is against the principle of natural justice. And further said that at the time of emergency the article prohibits moving to the supreme court but there no provision that no one can’t move to the high court so the order is valid

JUDGMENT:

The court held that if there is any rule that the fundamental rights will be suspended by the Presidential order under article 359 that it can not be questioned in any of the courts. Hence the decision of the high court stands suspended.

Critical Analysis:

In the case of K.S. PUTTASWAMY V. UNION OF INDIA which overruled the above judgment after 40 years and said the enforcement of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution cannot be suspended by a Presidential rule and made the 44TH AMENDMENT. The supreme court said that the right to life is an important fundamental right and no person shall be deprived of his life and liberty except according to the procedure established by law. The right to life and personal liberty which cannot be separated. Article21 is not the creation of the constitution it is inherited by every individual which cannot be separated. they are born when a human is born. Henceforth Article 21 and 22 can not be suspended during the time of emergency. And held that any person can approach the court of law under Article 32 and 226 if Article 21 is violated during the time of national emergency.