Relevancy- One has to see the present day conditions in the country. It seems that law and order is breaking down everywhere, and anarchy and chaos is becoming rampant… Even small time criminals are armed with country made pistols and bombs, while the more ‘sophisticated’ ones are using Kalashnikovs and AK-47s. This state of affairs must be taken into account while construing Article 21.
Article 21 states "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law".
In my opinion the right to bear arms is embedded in Article 21 of the Constitution and hence it is a fundamental right. No doubt this right, like all fundamental rights, is subject to reasonable restrictions, but the reasonability of the restriction must be judged from the point of view of the prevailing social conditions and not in the abstract Hence what may have been reasonable earlier may no longer be reasonable today.
The early decisions of the Supreme Court took a narrow view of Article 21. In the leading case of A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras , it was held that the words 'procedure established by law' in Article 21 are not to be given the, vide and fluid meaning of the expression 'due process of law' in the U. S, Constitution, but means only State made statutory law. It was held there in that Articles 19 and 21 are mutually exclusive and hence the reasonability test in Article 19 is not to be applied when construing a law from the point of view of Article 21 and as long as there was some statutory law which prescribed a procedure for depriving a person of his life or liberty it meets the requirement of Article 21. Thus Article 21 was construed as a guarantee against executive action unsupported by law.
- Justice M. Katju @(Ganesh Chandra Bhatt vs District Magistrate Almora And ... on 12 March, 1993
Equivalent citations: 1993 (1) BLJR 669)
Suggested by- Mr. Rohit Srivastava Advocate (Dehradun)
No comments:
Post a Comment