TGPSC GROUP-I MAINS ANSWER WRITING SERIES

Wed Jun 25, 2025

Q "The Constitution of India is a living instrument with capabilities of enormous dynamism. It is a constitution made for a progressive society." Illustrate with special reference to the expanding horizons of the right to life and personal liberty.

download pdf
Approach:

Introduction:
-Begin by defining the Indian Constitution as a living and evolving document that embodies the ideals of justice, dignity, and liberty. Mention that Article 21 exemplifies this dynamism through its expanding interpretation over time.

Body:
Structure the body using clear subheadings based on landmark judicial expansions of Article 21:
1. Right to Live with Dignity – Maneka Gandhi (1978).
2. Right against Bonded Labour – Bandhua Mukti Morcha (1984)
3.Right to Livelihood – Olga Tellis (1985)
4. Right to Clean Environment – M.C. Mehta (1988)
5. Right to Health – Mohinder Singh Chawla (1997)
6. Right to Food – PUCL (2001)
7. Right to Die with Dignity – Aruna Shanbaug (2011)
8. Right to Privacy – Puttaswamy (2017)
9. Decriminalization of Homosexuality – Navtej Johar (2018)
10. Right to Marry a Person of One’s Choice – Shafin Jahan (2018)
11. Right to Be Forgotten – Emerging from Puttaswamy
12. Bail as Rule – Prem Prakash (2023)
13. Right to Digital Access – Recognized in 2025
Conclusion:
 Conclude by highlighting how Article 21 reflects the Constitution’s transformative character, allowing it to stay aligned with contemporary

Introduction:
The Constitution of India is often described as a living instrument for its ability to adapt and evolve with changing times. This inherent dynamism ensures its continued relevance in addressing contemporary challenges, thereby nurturing a progressive and inclusive society. A prominent illustration of this adaptability is the expanding judicial interpretation of Article 21, which guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty.

Body:
Expanding Horizons of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty:
1. Right to Live with Dignity: · In Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21 beyond mere physical survival, affirming that life under the Constitution must include dignity, fairness, and freedom from arbitrariness.

2. Right against Bonded Labour:
-Through Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union of India (1984), the Court upheld the right to be free from bonded labour, recognising it as a violation of personal liberty and dignity, and reinforcing the State's duty to eradicate exploitative practices.

3. Right to Livelihood:
-In Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), the apex court ruled that the right to livelihood is encompassed within the right to life, ensuring that economic means of survival are protected as part of a dignified existence.

4. Right to Clean Environment:
-The judgment in M.C. Mehta vs Union of India (1988) embedded environmental protection within Article 21, affirming that a pollution-free, wholesome environment is essential to a meaningful and healthy life.

5. Right to Health:
-In State of Punjab vs Mohinder Singh Chawla (1997), the judiciary interpreted the right to life to include the right to access healthcare, recognising health as foundational to a dignified and secure life.

6. Right to Food:
-In People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) vs Union of India (2001), the Supreme Court recognised the right to food as integral to the right to life, leading to major interventions in the public distribution and nutrition systems.

7. Right to Die with Dignity:
-In Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs Union of India (2011), the Court acknowledged the right to die with dignity, permitting passive euthanasia under strict conditions, and affirming individual autonomy in end-of-life decisions.

8. Right to Privacy:
-The landmark ruling in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy vs Union of India (2017) recognised the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, encompassing bodily autonomy, decisional freedom, and protection of personal data.

9. Decriminalization of Homosexuality:
-In Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court decriminalised consensual same-sex relations, holding that such criminalisation violated the right to life with dignity and personal liberty under Article 21. The judgment marked a transformative moment for LGBTQ+ rights, reflecting the Constitution’s adaptability to evolving notions of equality, identity, and human dignity.

10. Right to Marry a Person of One’s Choice:
-In Shafin Jahan vs Asokan K.M. (2018), the Supreme Court upheld the right to marry as a component of personal liberty under Article 21. It affirmed that consensual adult relationships, including interfaith and inter-caste marriages, are constitutionally protected expressions of individual autonomy and dignity.

11. Right to Be Forgotten:
-Although still evolving in Indian law, the Right to Be Forgotten—emerging from the Puttaswamy judgment—is increasingly recognised under Article 21. It supports an individual’s right to remove personal data from public platforms when its continued availability violates privacy and dignity, especially in cases involving acquittal, past offences, or outdated personal records.

12. Bail is the rule, jail is an exception:
-In Prem Prakash v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that “bail is the rule, jail is an exception,” emphasizing that unjustified detention violates the right to personal liberty under Article 21, and liberty must be preserved unless compelling reasons justify its curtailment.

Conclusion:
The evolving interpretation of Article 21 illustrates the Constitution’s living character and its responsiveness to emerging rights. In 2025, the Supreme Court acknowledged the Right to Digital Access as intrinsic to the Right to Life, reinforcing that inclusion in the digital realm, access to information, and online autonomy are essential to human dignity and personal liberty. Such progressive interventions ensure that the Constitution continues to remain relevant, humane, and forward-looking.