This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indian Law, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Indian Law. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indian LawWikipedia:WikiProject Indian LawTemplate:WikiProject Indian LawIndian Law articles
This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It overruled A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, which had implied the exclusiveness of fundamental rights, and established a relationship between Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution (known as the 'golden triangle' or 'trinity'),[1]: 222 holding that a law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of them.[1]: 220 The decision also held, once again overruling A. K. Gopalan that a 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable.[1]: 220
Latest comment: 1 year ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India in which the Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It overruled A. K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, which had implied the exclusiveness of fundamental rights, and established a relationship between Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution (known as the 'golden triangle' or 'trinity'),[1]: 222 holding that a law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of them.[1]: 220 The decision also held, once again overruling A. K. Gopalan that a 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable.[1]: 220 2405:201:6015:80DB:11D6:F208:5CED:8808 (talk) 02:28, 6 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
