• 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:52228

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:52228

News Updates

Understanding the Process of Issuing Summons in In...
11 Jul 2023     Views:678
Understanding the Unlawful Activities (Prevention)...
10 Jul 2023     Views:636
Understanding the Mental Health Act in India: A St...
09 Jul 2023     Views:511
Combating Manual Scavenging in India: A Call for S...
07 Jul 2023     Views:606
Impleadment in Supreme Court of India: A Comprehen...
05 Jul 2023     Views:673
Unraveling the Distinction: Culpable Homicide vs. ...
03 Jul 2023     Views:581
Understanding the Difference between Money Bills a...
02 Jul 2023     Views:344
Understanding the Civil Procedure Code in India: A...
01 Jul 2023     Views:428
The Rights of Criminals in India: Upholding Justic...
30 Jun 2023     Views:337
Exploring the Differences between the US and India...
29 Jun 2023     Views:318
What to Do If the Police Refuse to Register Your F...
26 Jun 2023     Views:473
Timeline of Environmental Protocols: A Global Effo...
25 Jun 2023     Views:343
How to Deal with Cheque Bounce Cases in India...
24 Jun 2023     Views:372
Pursuing a Lucrative Litigation Career in Indian L...
22 Jun 2023     Views:340
Understanding the Emergency Provisions of India: S...
21 Jun 2023     Views:369
Environment Legislation in India: A Comprehensive ...
20 Jun 2023     Views:335
Understanding the Emergency Powers of the Constitu...
18 Jun 2023     Views:341
Understanding the Emergency Powers of the Constitu...
17 Jun 2023     Views:338
Timeline of Same-Sex Laws in India: A Journey Towa...
16 Jun 2023     Views:355
Sir Creek Dispute and Legal Implications...
15 Jun 2023     Views:398
Jurisprudence of NDPS Laws in India: A Comprehensi...
14 Jun 2023     Views:416
Impleadment Proceedings: A Comprehensive Guide to ...
13 Jun 2023     Views:404
Understanding Continuing Mandamus: A Powerful Judi...
12 Jun 2023     Views:789
Res Judicata: The Doctrine of Finality in Legal Pr...
10 Jun 2023     Views:461
Mastering the Art of Legal Drafting: A Comprehensi...
08 Jun 2023     Views:422
Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CP...
07 Jun 2023     Views:2583
Understanding the Laws of War: Protecting Humanity...
03 Jun 2023     Views:375
Understanding the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC...
02 Jun 2023     Views:548
The National Drug and Psychotropic Substances (NDP...
01 Jun 2023     Views:364
A Step-by-Step Guide: How to File an FIR in India...
31 May 2023     Views:383
Zero FIR: An Effective Tool for Prompt Criminal Ju...
30 May 2023     Views:416
Unveiling the Dissent of Judges in Judicial Judgme...
28 May 2023     Views:353
Environmental Laws in India: Safeguarding Nature f...
25 May 2023     Views:457
The Recusal of Supreme Court of India Judges from ...
24 May 2023     Views:387
Understanding the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Cour...
23 May 2023     Views:467
Article 142 of the Constitution of India: A Compre...
22 May 2023     Views:558
Landmark Judgments in Arbitration Law in India: A...
21 May 2023     Views:871
Landmark Cases on Anticipatory Bail in India: A Pa...
20 May 2023     Views:2374
Embracing the Future: How AI is Revolutionizing th...
18 May 2023     Views:357
Understanding Narcotics Laws in India: A Comprehen...
17 May 2023     Views:396
Understanding Indian Laws on Cross-Border Transact...
16 May 2023     Views:723
ADR mechanism of legal adjudication in India...
15 May 2023     Views:292
Validity of foreign arbitral award in India throug...
14 May 2023     Views:385
Scope of Section 151 CPC...
13 May 2023     Views:1195
Detailed Overview on Section 482 of Crpc...
11 May 2023     Views:707
Scope of Decree under CPC...
10 May 2023     Views:578
Legal development of Arbitration Laws in India....
09 May 2023     Views:555
Arbitration Laws in India...
07 May 2023     Views:461
Impact of COVID-19 on Legal Industry...
06 May 2023     Views:365
Chargesheet not having authority's valid sanction ...
02 May 2023     Views:575
Same-Sex Marriage in India...
30 Apr 2023     Views:461
National Commission for Women...
27 Apr 2023     Views:390
Law making process of India....
26 Apr 2023     Views:692
Bail Provisions in India...
25 Apr 2023     Views:423
Life imprisonment in Criminal Law in India...
24 Apr 2023     Views:337
Contempt of Court...
23 Apr 2023     Views:501
The collegium system of Judiciary in India....
22 Apr 2023     Views:382
Remarriage before Expiry of Limitation Period to f...
21 Apr 2023     Views:377
Need for strict measure of NDPS laws in India....
20 Apr 2023     Views:358
Nature of Offence under Section 138 of NI Act is Q...
19 Apr 2023     Views:1168
Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Plaint cannot be rejected m...
18 Apr 2023     Views:999
Mediation: At the Dawn of Golden Age organized at ...
16 Apr 2023     Views:508
Central Government's motto should be mediate, not ...
15 Apr 2023     Views:386
Ambedkar Jayanti Celebrations...
14 Apr 2023     Views:544
Supreme Court of India calls for Preventive Measur...
12 Apr 2023     Views:341
Pursuing LL.M is not break in Law Practice, Rules ...
11 Apr 2023     Views:403
Law should take into consideration realities of co...
10 Apr 2023     Views:393
Delhi High Court said that peeping into public bat...
08 Apr 2023     Views:534
Delhi High Court denies bails to AAP's Satyendra J...
06 Apr 2023     Views:979
Supreme Court’s Triple Talaq Judgement Would App...
30 Jan 2023     Views:814
Article 311(1) | An Order of Removal From Service ...
26 Jan 2023     Views:1191
Leaders shouldn't disrespect the President or Pri...
17 Jan 2023     Views:691
New bench will hear Ashwini Upadhyay's Supreme Cou...
15 Jan 2023     Views:773
Person Who Drove Rashly with the Knowledge that it...
12 Jan 2023     Views:989
The rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot b...
11 Jan 2023     Views:912
Supreme Court sends a notice about a petition for ...
09 Jan 2023     Views:986
The Meghalaya High Court's hold on the MoU definin...
08 Jan 2023     Views:989
Google's appeal of the ?1,337 crore fine from the ...
04 Jan 2023     Views:400
SC Issues Notice In A Batch Of Pleas Challenging T...
03 Jan 2023     Views:520
The Supreme Court rejects appeals against the 2016...
02 Jan 2023     Views:509
Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar rema...
01 Jan 2023     Views:583
Gender Discrimination in intestate succession unde...
29 Dec 2022     Views:856
Section 300 CrPC BarTrial of a Person Not Only for...
29 Dec 2022     Views:743
Centre Informs Rajya Sabha That There Is No Propos...
28 Dec 2022     Views:522
Calcutta High Court: Depriving wife of her Stridha...
27 Dec 2022     Views:730
Sec 498A: An Apology should be tempered with genui...
24 Dec 2022     Views:520
Kerala High Court: Search engines like Google cann...
23 Dec 2022     Views:652
Rules of the Game Cannot be Changed After the Game...
23 Dec 2022     Views:3064
Bombay High Court: Social Media has become an impo...
21 Dec 2022     Views:640
Calcutta High Court Grants Bail to Murder Accused ...
19 Dec 2022     Views:590
Sec 438 CrPC: Anticipatory Bail Plea is Not Mainta...
19 Dec 2022     Views:990
Rights of secured creditors under SARFAESI, Recove...
18 Dec 2022     Views:495
Can a man accuse his wife of domestic violence? De...
17 Dec 2022     Views:885
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
15 Dec 2022     Views:963
Guardianship of an illegitimate minor granted to h...
14 Dec 2022     Views:503
Under the POCSO Act, rehabilitation of the victim ...
14 Dec 2022     Views:516
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF BAIL PROVISIONS UNDER THE IND...
13 Dec 2022     Views:1368
The current collegium system shouldn't be abandone...
10 Dec 2022     Views:528
Framing of a uniform marriage code applicable to a...
09 Dec 2022     Views:768
Telangana High Court: Appropriation of a Decree of...
07 Dec 2022     Views:558
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:90909
  • Case Analysis: THE BERUBARI UNION CASE
    On 14 Dec 2020    Views:64671
  • DOCTRINE OF ELECTION UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882
    On 08 Jul 2020    Views:64271
  • Case Analysis: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India
    On 11 Dec 2020    Views:63721
  • A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88)
    On 08 Nov 2020    Views:52228
View all >>

Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified

Allow Cookies!

By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies

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.