• +91 9632247247
  • Sign In/Sign Up
  • Menu
  • +Clients Back

    • Get Free Legal Answers
    • Get Fee Estimates
    • Find Lawyers
  • +Lawyers

    • Case Diary & Office Manager
    • Post News & Artilces
    • Post Jobs & Internships
  • +Law Students

    • Campus Ambassadors
    • Find Jobs & Internships
    • Post News & Articles
    • Resource Sharing
  • +Law Schools

    • Post Admissions
    • Post Opportunities
    • Get Law School Rating

  • Home
  • Legal News
  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)

Latest News

Back

A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)

Courtesy/By: Nishiket Dave  |  08 Nov 2020     Views:49159

A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)

CASE INTRODUCTION

It is one of the most common and known cases. This is the first case held by the apex court in which various articles of the Constitution of India contained in the Chapter on Fundamental Rights and were discussed. The main articles like 19, 21 & 22 were dealt with in this case. Nearly after 30 years of this case, the Apex Court did away with the restrictive view of the rights embrace therein, by Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India. Nevertheless, for the jurisprudence of Fundamental rights in India, it still makes an important part of the evolution. The most conspicuous feature of this case is its dissenting verdict given by Justice Fazl Ali, one of the two dissenting judges in a six judges bench. The dissenting judgment given by him back in 1950, went on to become an example of personal liberty and liberalized viewpoint for the fundamental rights.

CASE FACTS

In this particular case the petition was made by Mr. A. K. Gopalan under Article 32(1) of the Constitution of India, In pursuance of an order made under the Preventive Detention Act, 1950, a writ of Habeus Corpus was filed against his detention. Mr. A.K. Gopalan was a communist leader, and since December 1947 he had been under detention, as imprisonment under ordinary criminal laws he was convicted & sentenced. However, these convictions were overruled by the court. A.k. Gopalan when detained, on 1st March 1950, was served upon an order by the State Government of Madras, made under section 3 (1) of the particular Act, which confers upon the State or Central Government. After then he challenged in court the legitimacy of the order under the Act on the ground that the Act violates humans fundamental rights as the provisions given under Articles 13, 19 & 21, and the provisions of this Act 4 of 1950 of Madras State are not in conformity with Article 22 of Indian Constitution. Mr. Gopalan also contended that the order issued was malafide.

ISSUES

  • Whether the detention Act of Madras State contravene the provisions of Article 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution?
  • Whether the State’s detention Act, 1950 provisions in accordance with Article 22 of the Indian Constitution?

REASONING/ARGUMENTS

In the case of A.K. Gopalan v. the State of Madras, it was held by the majority judges that punitive and preventive detention were outside the ambit of Article 19 of the Constitution of India and hence the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 had not violated it. It was also contended by the court that the said article which provides protection to citizens who are free, therefore not the citizen whose freedom is restrained by law, and the question of enforcing Article 19(1) does not arise.

The Preventive Detention Act, 1950 has followed the valid procedure as in the form enacted by the state’s law and therefore the Apex court came upon the argument that it does not infringe upon the rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Various provisions of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 are covered under Article 22 and those which are not, are added through the aspects of Article 21. The Apex court held that Section 3 of the Act was justified and as it was valid to provide such discretionary powers to the executive, in addition with the majority court also agreed upon the validity of Section 7 and 11 of the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 as under Article 2(7)(b) the parliament has not mandatory power to set a minimum detention period and under Article 22(5) and 22(6) the right of representation which off to be heard verbally are not necessary. Section 14 of the said Act was also declared ultra vires because it contended the court’s right to determine the validity of detention.

JUDGEMENT FOR A. K. GOPALAN V. STATE OF MADRAS

It was held by the Supreme Court of India, that any of the sections of the Preventive detention Act, IV of 1950 has infringed the provisions of Part III of the constitution barring Section 14 of the Act, restricting the declaration of the grounds of detention. Section 14 of the Preventive Detention Act, IV of 1950 was declared Ultra Vires, nonetheless the declaration by the court did not affect the validity of the act as a whole.

Dissent

The important dissent was given by Fazl Ali as he said, the court when analyzing fundamental rights violations needs to coordinately interpret the various Articles under Part III of the Constitution of India and not merely as silos. Further, Section12 and 14 of the Act while contravening Article 22 of the Indian Constitution were also contended to violating freedom and personal liberty of the individual. Moreover, Justice Mahajan differed in his conclusion and holding Section 12 to be ultra-vires while agreeing to the majority judges' interpretation.

AFTERLIFE: A. K. GOPALAN V. STATE OF MADRAS

The Fundamental rights through the reasoning of procedural by the due process are now read separately, as interpreted in the A.K. Gopalan’s case, which was denounced and the understands the substantive due process which was brought in for the upcoming cases. In the case of Maneka Gandhi v Union of India, the Apex court held that the procedure for Article 21 has to be just, fair and reasonable and also should be in accordance with the principles of equality and freedom under Article 13 and 19 of the Indian Constitution, thus the provisions of fundamental rights were established to be read together.

Conclusion

This is a landmark Judgement contended by the bench of 6 Judges where the majority opinion in the case was that article 21 which covering procedure established by law would simply mean the law established by the state. The meaning of Law in itself is intended upon, and it is contended that it would provide a too wide understanding of reading it within rules of natural justice as the connotations of natural justice leaving them formerly undefined. This verdict progresses from the idea of law and natural morals which are uncleared. Professor Hart, who said that there is a link between law and morals but there is no interdependence. The court in the said case exaggerated this reasoning through the interpretation that there is a specific standard set for law which is the formulation through legislation and legitimizes it.

Furthermore, it is well quoted by the court that law was meant to be understood as “jus” that is, a law in the abstract sense of principles of natural justice and not as “rex” that is, enacted law. The true form of legitimacy for any law is the recognition of the principles of natural justice.

 


Document:


Courtesy/By: Nishiket Dave  |  08 Nov 2020     Views:49159

News Updates

Supreme Court’s Triple Talaq Judgement Would App...
30 Jan 2023     Views:93
Article 311(1) | An Order of Removal From Service ...
26 Jan 2023     Views:126
Leaders shouldn't disrespect the President or Pri...
17 Jan 2023     Views:111
New bench will hear Ashwini Upadhyay's Supreme Cou...
15 Jan 2023     Views:182
Person Who Drove Rashly with the Knowledge that it...
12 Jan 2023     Views:133
The rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot b...
11 Jan 2023     Views:160
Supreme Court sends a notice about a petition for ...
09 Jan 2023     Views:170
The Meghalaya High Court's hold on the MoU definin...
08 Jan 2023     Views:132
Google's appeal of the ?1,337 crore fine from the ...
04 Jan 2023     Views:100
SC Issues Notice In A Batch Of Pleas Challenging T...
03 Jan 2023     Views:147
The Supreme Court rejects appeals against the 2016...
02 Jan 2023     Views:128
Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar rema...
01 Jan 2023     Views:170
Gender Discrimination in intestate succession unde...
29 Dec 2022     Views:126
Section 300 CrPC BarTrial of a Person Not Only for...
29 Dec 2022     Views:156
Centre Informs Rajya Sabha That There Is No Propos...
28 Dec 2022     Views:172
Calcutta High Court: Depriving wife of her Stridha...
27 Dec 2022     Views:246
Sec 498A: An Apology should be tempered with genui...
24 Dec 2022     Views:137
Kerala High Court: Search engines like Google cann...
23 Dec 2022     Views:181
Rules of the Game Cannot be Changed After the Game...
23 Dec 2022     Views:273
Bombay High Court: Social Media has become an impo...
21 Dec 2022     Views:163
Calcutta High Court Grants Bail to Murder Accused ...
19 Dec 2022     Views:140
Sec 438 CrPC: Anticipatory Bail Plea is Not Mainta...
19 Dec 2022     Views:147
Rights of secured creditors under SARFAESI, Recove...
18 Dec 2022     Views:144
Can a man accuse his wife of domestic violence? De...
17 Dec 2022     Views:210
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
15 Dec 2022     Views:190
Guardianship of an illegitimate minor granted to h...
14 Dec 2022     Views:134
Under the POCSO Act, rehabilitation of the victim ...
14 Dec 2022     Views:140
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
13 Dec 2022     Views:140
The current collegium system shouldn't be abandone...
10 Dec 2022     Views:138
Framing of a uniform marriage code applicable to a...
09 Dec 2022     Views:199
Telangana High Court: Appropriation of a Decree of...
07 Dec 2022     Views:156
Appointment Cannot Be Denied Merely Because The Ca...
06 Dec 2022     Views:173
FIR has been Lodged for Settling Monetary Dispute-...
06 Dec 2022     Views:166
Form 16 Issued By Employer Is Reliable Evidence To...
06 Dec 2022     Views:147
Bombay high court issued instructions in a PIL loo...
06 Dec 2022     Views:122
CA Cannot Be Prosecuted for ingenuine documents su...
05 Dec 2022     Views:153
Bombay High Court Slams Maharashtra's State Mental...
04 Dec 2022     Views:119
Ex-parte order passed by Delhi High Court for prot...
04 Dec 2022     Views:142
AFTER HAVING CONSENSUAL INTERCOURSE, DECLINING TO ...
30 Nov 2022     Views:215
Allahabad HC Rules That Marriage Certificate Issue...
29 Nov 2022     Views:134
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ASKS BCI TO REPLY TO THE PLEA ...
28 Nov 2022     Views:117
Second and Successive Anticipatory Bail Applicatio...
26 Nov 2022     Views:161
Court Sentences Man To Six-Month Imprisonment For ...
26 Nov 2022     Views:128
Delhi High Court awards grande legal costs of Rs. ...
24 Nov 2022     Views:184
What Will Happen If Lawyers Go on Strike and Meet ...
23 Nov 2022     Views:152
KERALA HC HELD THAT HUSBAND IS LIABLE FOR SEX WITH...
23 Nov 2022     Views:559
SC Refuses To Entertain Plea Seeking Two Child Pol...
22 Nov 2022     Views:148
DUE TO DISTRICT JUDGES' RELUCTANCE TO GRANT BAIL O...
21 Nov 2022     Views:126
Supreme Court seeks Union Government to answer a p...
21 Nov 2022     Views:154
SOCIETY'S OUTRAGE NOT GROUND TO SUPPRESS FREE SPEE...
20 Nov 2022     Views:144
Plea for guidelines on seizure of digital device...
19 Nov 2022     Views:154
MLA Poaching case...
19 Nov 2022     Views:112
Supreme Court stays Bombay High Court's observatio...
18 Nov 2022     Views:135
P&H HC SAYS, CHEQUE BOUNCE COMPLAINT FILED ON THE ...
16 Nov 2022     Views:161
J&K will always be part of India; Civil society gr...
15 Nov 2022     Views:167
POCSO not meant to criminalise consensual romantic...
14 Nov 2022     Views:165
CONTEMPT OF COURT CAN’T BE ISSUED ON THE SHEER G...
14 Nov 2022     Views:181
POSCO ACT Slightest penetration will constitute ag...
13 Nov 2022     Views:192
Police Reforms not possible unless police official...
12 Nov 2022     Views:167
GYANVAPI-KASHI VISHWANATH: ALLAHABAD HC DIRECTS AS...
12 Nov 2022     Views:129
NO RIGHT EXISTS FOR A SUBSEQUENT PURCHASER TO CLAI...
12 Nov 2022     Views:144
United Nations calls for Investigation into protes...
08 Jul 2022     Views:534
5 Verdict by SC And NGT brought 8k crore cost to G...
08 Jul 2022     Views:553
Right to Abortion struck down by US Supreme Court...
02 Jul 2022     Views:529
UNHRC to hold a special session to discuss Ukraine...
21 May 2022     Views:574
Putin Responsible for war crimes: Justin Trudeau d...
20 May 2022     Views:567
Sri Lanka: former President calls for new polls as...
20 May 2022     Views:476
CAA will be implemented once Covid Subsides: Amit ...
18 May 2022     Views:514
Modi to improve bilateral relations with Nepal dur...
15 May 2022     Views:434
Moscow hopes for a peace settlement: Vladimir Puti...
13 May 2022     Views:432
Unique opportunity for sustainable and inclusive g...
29 Apr 2022     Views:353
PM Modi to inaugurate India’s flagship Foreign p...
27 Apr 2022     Views:340
Emanuel Macron defeats Marine Le Pen for a second ...
26 Apr 2022     Views:424
India suspends tourists visas for Chinese national...
26 Apr 2022     Views:352
Defence minister asks US defence firms to tap ‘M...
24 Apr 2022     Views:293
India and crisis-hit Sri Lanka revive talks to lin...
24 Apr 2022     Views:324
Government should take an unequivocal stand in the...
23 Apr 2022     Views:320
IMF lauds India’s high growth rate...
22 Apr 2022     Views:344
China and Solomon Islands sign a military pact....
21 Apr 2022     Views:332
Russia Suspended from United Nations Human Rights ...
09 Apr 2022     Views:462
Delhi HC: Order CBI to revoke travel ban on Aakar ...
09 Apr 2022     Views:432
Nagaland first women MP Phangnon Konyak takes oath...
07 Apr 2022     Views:508
Widespread protests amid Sri Lanka’s economic cr...
07 Apr 2022     Views:324
Government servants cannot take part in protest: K...
01 Apr 2022     Views:318
RUSSIA-UKRAINE : PEACE TALKS BEGIN IN TURKEY....
30 Mar 2022     Views:421
Sc asks Tushar Mehta to clarify Centre’s stand o...
30 Mar 2022     Views:378
NO-TRUST MOTION AGAINST PM IMRAN KHAN IN PAKISTAN ...
27 Mar 2022     Views:396
NATO TO PROVIDE NUCLEAR THREAT PROTECTION TO UKRAI...
27 Mar 2022     Views:399
KOLKATA HC:SUBMIT STATUS REPORT ON BIRBHUM VIOLENC...
24 Mar 2022     Views:420
Russia warns about using nuclear weapon if there i...
24 Mar 2022     Views:524
Sri Lanka facing the worst economic crisis....
23 Mar 2022     Views:381
Lok Sabha: Updates on the second budget session...
14 Mar 2022     Views:322
Madras High Court held that using government emplo...
01 Mar 2022     Views:535
Russia closes Airspace for UK flights...
27 Feb 2022     Views:481
Karnataka High Court reserves judgment on hijab ca...
27 Feb 2022     Views:455
Delhi High Court ordered Twitter to take down the ...
25 Feb 2022     Views:433
ED conducts raid at the India Bulls finance Centre...
22 Feb 2022     Views:378
India and UAE signed a Free Trade Agreement worth ...
21 Feb 2022     Views:379
Refund of the fines collected by the UP Govt again...
20 Feb 2022     Views:390
Comprehensive Legislation for Domestic Workers is ...
18 Feb 2022     Views:588
FIND A LAWYER




FIND A LAW SCHOOL



Most Read News Articles

  • Sabrimala Verdict (28 sept 2018) - A End of Taboo.
    On 07 Oct 2020    Views:90427
  • DOCTRINE OF ELECTION UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882
    On 08 Jul 2020    Views:61324
  • Case Analysis: THE BERUBARI UNION CASE
    On 14 Dec 2020    Views:60807
  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)
    On 08 Nov 2020    Views:49159
  • Case Analysis: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India
    On 11 Dec 2020    Views:46354
View all >>

Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified

86540

Lawyers Network

103860

Users

630

Cities Serving

114

Law Schools Network

59824

Law Students Network

About us

  • Company Profile

Indian Major Laws

  • Indian Constitution
  • IPC
  • CrPC
  • CPC
  • Companies Act
  • Indian Evidence Act
  • CGST Act
  • Limitation Act

Policies

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund & Cancellation

    Ads & Media

  • Resource Sharing
  • Advertiser(Sign Up/Login)
  • Media

    Careers

  • Internships
  • Jobs
  • Student Journalists

    HELP & SUPPORT

  • Contact Us
  • Grievances
  • Test

News

  • Legal News
  • Post Article
  • Post Interview

Legal Library

  • Central Acts
  • Deeds Drafts [1127 ]
  • Legal Maxims

Connect

Lawsisto Direct

 

  •  
  •  
DISCLAIMER
Copyright © Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved.
Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may
be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.