Summary of Recent judgment

Case: ADM Jabalpur v Shivkant Shukla



Date of Order / Judgment: 14th August, 2024

The Matter Heard by Bench: K. Subba Rao, J., K. N. Wanchoo, J., and M. H. Beg, J.

Background

The ADM Jabalpur case, officially known as ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India in 1976. The case arose during the Emergency period declared by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi from 1975 to 1977. The petitioners, including Shivkant Shukla, challenged the detention without trial under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), arguing that their fundamental rights were being violated.

Issues
  • 1. Whether the fundamental right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution could be suspended during the Emergency period.
  • 2. Whether the judicial review of such detention orders was permissible.
Observation:
  • • Majority Opinion: The majority, led by Chief Justice A.N. Ray, held that during the Emergency, the President's proclamation could suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, including those under Article 21. They reasoned that the Constitution allowed for the suspension of these rights during an Emergency, and thus, the judiciary had no jurisdiction to review such detentions.
  • • Justice Khanna’s Dissent: Justice Khanna dissented, arguing that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 was inviolable and could not be suspended, even during an Emergency. He asserted that any law or order that violated this fundamental right was unconstitutional.
Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the detention orders and the suspension of the right to move the court for enforcement of Article 21 during the Emergency. The majority decision essentially allowed for the suspension of fundamental rights without judicial review during the Emergency period.

Following the end of the Emergency, the Indian Constitution was amended by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. This amendment introduced specific prohibitions, stating that the rights under Articles 20 (protection in respect of conviction for offenses) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) could not be suspended during an Emergency. This amendment aimed to address concerns raised by the ADM Jabalpur decision and to safeguard these fundamental rights more robustly.

The ADM Jabalpur judgment was recently overruled by the Supreme Court in the case of K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017). In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the inviolability of the right to life and personal liberty, establishing that the principles of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution cannot be suspended even during a state of emergency.