In FRANCIS CORALIE MULLIN v. ADMINISTRATOR, UNION TERRITORY OF DELHI, AIR 1981 SC 746, the Supreme Court held that the right to life under Article 21:
Acovers only mere animal existence (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746) (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746)
Bincludes the right to LIVE WITH HUMAN DIGNITY and all that goes along with it — namely, the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing, and expressing oneself, mixing with fellow human beings
Cis restricted to physical survival (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746) (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746)
Dexcludes any social dimension (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746) (cf. Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746)
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. includes the right to LIVE WITH HUMAN DIGNITY and all that goes along with it — namely, the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing, and expressing oneself, mixing with fellow human beings
1. In Francis Coralie Mullin (1981), the Supreme Court (per Bhagwati J.) interpreted Article 21 expansively.
2. The Court held: 'The right to life includes the right to live with HUMAN DIGNITY and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing and expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and commingling with fellow human beings.'
3. This was a watershed in transforming Article 21 from a NEGATIVE right (against arbitrary deprivation) to a POSITIVE right (to human dignity).
4. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: UDHR 1948 / ICCPR 1966 / ICESCR 1966 / CAT 1984 / CEDAW 1979 / CRC 1989 / PHRA 1993 / Constitution Part III — Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746_
Related questions
The RIGHT TO FOOD under ICESCR Article 11 was elaborated in CESCR General Comment No. 12 (Article 13 ICESCR recognises the right to EDUCATION. Primary education shall be:Section 11A NHRC complaints are admitted on grounds of:The KAMPALA AMENDMENTS to the Rome Statute (2010) activated the CRIME OF AGGRESSION jurisdThe DOCTRINE OF EXTRA-TERRITORIAL APPLICATION of HUMAN RIGHTS treaties (per the ICJ Wall AThe PRINCIPLE OF PROGRESSIVE REALIZATION in ICESCR (Article 2(1)) is balanced by the doctrIn NUREMBERG TRIALS 1945-46, the International Military Tribunal articulated the principleArticle 41 ICCPR provides for INTER-STATE COMPLAINTS — a State Party may complain to the H