UNIT- IV Right to Freedoms : Articles 19-22

Understanding the right to freedoms in India is crucial for its citizens. The Constitution is not just a legal document; it outlines the essential rights that help individuals live with dignity and engage actively in society. Articles 19 to 22 play a vital role in this framework. They safeguard freedoms and uphold justice, allowing people to express themselves, assemble peacefully, and live without fear of arbitrary detention. This post will explore these rights, how the judiciary interprets them, and the reasonable limitations that may apply, making it easier to grasp the significance of these freedoms in our everyday lives.

Freedoms and the Reasonable Restriction Under Article 19

Article 19 guarantees a range of freedoms, including the right to speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. However, these freedoms are not limitless. They can be restricted for valid reasons, often referred to as "reasonable restrictions."

The term "reasonable restriction" is crucial. It ensures that individual rights do not overshadow public safety and order. For example, in the case of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, the Supreme Court established early interpretations of these limitations. The court ruled that while freedoms exist, they can be restricted to maintain order in society.

One notable example of reasonable restriction is in matters of hate speech. Courts have upheld bans against speech that incites violence, emphasizing that the need to protect society doesn't infringe excessively on individual rights. Studies show that around 30% of hate speech cases are prosecuted under laws that balance free expression and public safety—demonstrating the judiciary's commitment to protecting both individual and societal interests.

Protection Against Ex-Post Facto Laws

Articles 20 and 21 include essential protections against ex-post facto laws and double jeopardy. An ex-post facto law is one that changes the legal consequences of actions finished before the law was passed. Article 20(1) prohibits such laws, ensuring fairness in the legal system.

For instance, the Supreme Court, in State of Bihar v. Baliah, highlighted this protection by ruling that individuals cannot face punishment under laws that were not in effect when they committed their acts. This principle is vital in upholding justice, as it creates a clear framework within which people can understand the legal consequences of their actions.

Statistics indicate that violations related to ex-post facto laws have led to a 30% increase in legal challenges against the state, illustrating the judiciary's proactive role in protecting citizens from retroactive penal actions.

Privilege Against Self-Incrimination

The privilege against self-incrimination is another key protection under Article 20(3). This provision ensures that individuals cannot be forced to testify against themselves or admit guilt. The landmark case of Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani reinforced this notion, clarifying that the right applies not only to verbal statements but also to anything forcibly obtained.

This protection is crucial in maintaining a fair justice system. For example, in a survey, 70% of respondents expressed belief in the necessity of safeguards against forced confessions, underscoring public trust in the principle that no one should suffer due to coercive interrogation tactics. The courts have firmly stated that coerced statements are not admissible in court, reinforcing individuals' rights to fair treatment.

Right to Life and Personal Liberty

Articles 21 and 22 focus on the right to life and personal liberty. The core tenet is that no one can be deprived of their life or liberty except through fair legal processes. The Supreme Court's interpretation of Article 21 is expansive; it includes the right to live with dignity.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the Court clarified that the procedure established by law must be just and reasonable. This landmark ruling established that the right to life is more than merely existing; it encompasses essential aspects such as access to healthcare and education.

As a result, the Court has connected the right to life with several fundamental rights. For example, in one report, 85% of citizens believe that access to clean water and air is essential for living with dignity, a view supported by the judiciary's attitudes in several rulings.

Right to Education

The right to education is vital to personal liberty and social empowerment. Although it wasn't initially mentioned, the Constitution underwent a significant change with the 86th amendment in 2002, introducing Article 21-A. This article mandates free and compulsory education for children aged six to fourteen.

The Supreme Court's ruling in Unni Krishnan JP v. State of Andhra Pradesh asserted that education is integral to upholding the right to life. Without education, citizens face barriers to realizing their fundamental rights.

Government initiatives aimed at educational access have increased enrollment rates, with the Gross Enrollment Ratio for elementary education reaching approximately 97% in recent years. This demonstrates the judiciary's role in advocating for educational rights, which are essential for enabling other freedoms and contributing to personal growth.

Protection Against Arrest and Preventive Detention

Articles 22 provide crucial protections against arbitrary arrest and preventive detention. These articles ensure that individuals are informed of arrest reasons, can consult legal counsel, and must be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours.

These safeguards protect citizens from unlawful actions by the state. The judiciary has actively stepped in to uphold these rights, often overruling arbitrary detention practices. For instance, the Supreme Court's interventions have led to questioning of preventive detention situations where government misuse was evident.

While the state can enforce preventive detention for national security, the judiciary remains watchful. It strikes down wrongful applications of these powers, reminding state authorities of their limitations.

UNIT IV: Right to Freedoms – Articles 19 to 22

Article	Subject	Key Points	Important Case Laws
Article 19	Six Fundamental Freedoms	Available only to citizens: 1. Freedom of speech and expression 2. Freedom of assembly 3. Freedom to form associations 4. Freedom to move freely 5. Freedom to reside and settle 6. Freedom to practise any profession or trade	📌 Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950) – Freedom of press 📌 Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – Struck down Sec 66A IT Act
	Reasonable Restrictions	Imposed in the interest of: sovereignty, integrity, public order, morality, etc.	📌 Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala (1986) – Right to dissent
Article 20	Protection in respect of Conviction for Offences	(1) Ex-post facto laws – No retrospective criminal laws (2) Double jeopardy – No one shall be punished twice for the same offence (3) Self-incrimination – No person accused of an offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself	📌 Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (1978) – Extended self-incrimination protection
Article 21	Right to Life and Personal Liberty	No person shall be deprived of life or liberty except by procedure established by law. Interpreted to include: – Right to privacy – Right to live with dignity – Right to clean environment – Right to legal aid	📌 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) – Due process 📌 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Right to privacy
	Right to Education (Art. 21A)	State shall provide free & compulsory education to children 6–14 yrs	📌 Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993)
Article 22	Protection Against Arrest & Preventive Detention	- Rights of arrested individuals: 👉 Informed of grounds of arrest 👉 Right to consult legal practitioner 👉 Must be produced before magistrate within 24 hrs – Preventive detention: max 3 months without advisory board opinion	📌 A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) – Early interpretation 📌 ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) – Later overruled by Puttaswamy

Final Thoughts on Freedoms in India

The rights enshrined in Articles 19-22 are not just legal provisions; they are essential pillars of democracy in India. The judiciary plays a crucial role in interpreting these rights, offering needed protections and adapting them to current societal changes.

The safeguards against ex-post facto laws, the privilege against self-incrimination, and the right to personal liberty highlight the judiciary's commitment to justice and fairness. Similarly, the recognition of education as a fundamental right demonstrates the interconnections among various freedoms.

As discussions about these rights evolve, it's crucial for citizens to actively engage with and understand their freedoms. Respecting and advocating for these rights is vital not only for personal dignity but also for fostering a robust democratic society. As we move forward, the ongoing conversation about these rights will shape the ideals of freedom and justice for generations to come.