A. D. M. Jabalpu Case (1976)

Supreme Court Judgement

• The Supreme Court held that Article 21 is the sole repository of the right to life and personal liberty against the state.

• If the enforcement of that right is suspended by a Presidential Order under Article 359, then the detenu will have no locus standi to file a writ petition challenging the legality of their detention.

• The Presidential Order dated 27th June 1975 stated that no person has the locus standi to move any petition before a High Court under Article 226 for a writ of habeas corpus or any other writ to challenge the legality of a detention order on any ground.

• The court upheld the constitutional validity of Section 16A(9) of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), 1971.

Impact of the Judgement

• The Supreme Court took a restrictive interpretation of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and delivered a seriously flawed judgement.

• The court argued that any claim to a writ of habeas corpus on any ground amounted to the enforcement of the right to life and personal liberty, which had been suspended by the Presidential Order.

• Consequently, the Supreme Court failed to fulfill its role as the defender and guarantor of the fundamental rights of citizens during the period of emergency (1975-77).

• Later, the 44th Amendment Act (1978) amended Article 359 to ensure that the enforcement of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 cannot be suspended by a Presidential Order.

• As a result of this amendment, the judgement delivered in this case is no longer considered good law and remains of only academic importance.