Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
- Whether the right to go abroad is part of personal liberty
- Whether the right under Art 19(1) has any geographical limitation
- Whether the power to impound a passport arbitrary -- in the general public interest if vague
- Principles of Natural Justice - whether it applied only to quasi-judicial orders or applies to administrative orders affecting the rights of citizens
- When a statute is silent on something, can laws of common justice apply?
(Passport being impounded without a clause of the individual being heard, principle of natural justice, audi alteram partem - let the other side be heard too)
Facts of the case (wikipedia)
- Maneka Gandhi's passport was impounded 'in the public interest' by an order dated 2 July 1977.
- When reasons for impounding her passport were sought, the Government of India declined to provide any "in the interests of the general public.
- Gandhi filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order because it violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
- The Union responded in their written submissions that her passport was impounded because her presence was likely to be required in connection with legal proceedings before a 'Commission of Inquiry'.
Key Takeaways from the Case Judgement
- Supreme Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Art 21 instead of limiting of rights of individuals against the state
- right of travel and to go outside the country is included in the right to personal liberty
- a 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable
Disclaimer: The posts are meant for educational and learning purposes for anyone interested in learning and discussing law. Emphasis is on making sure the most important learnings and takeaways of the case and legal implications are presented accordingly