GIAN KAUR VS STATE OF PUNJAB AIR 1996 SC 946

AUTHOR – T.CHARUMATHI, STUDENT AT SCHOOL OF EXCELLENCE IN LAW, TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – T.CHARUMATHI, GIAN KAUR VS STATE OF PUNJAB AIR 1996 SC 946, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (4) OF 2026, PG. 420-425, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

INTRODUCTION:

Article 21 of the Constitution of India provides that no person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except in accordance with a procedure established by law. The importance of this article has been reiterated by the judicial authorities of our country on many occasions and is widely regarded as one of the fundamental tenets of civilized society. Public policy prohibits the enactment of laws which deprive individuals of their life or liberty for arbitrary/irrational reasons, thereby contravening fundamental human rights. The necessity of Article 21 is fundamental to the principles of justice and rule of law and is such that it can be suspended even in cases of national emergencies. Bhagwati J., writing for the Court in Francis Coralie Mullin v. The Administrator, ^[1]also spoke about the significance of Article 21 as a constitutional principle integral to democratic governance. The article scope includes all cases where someone loses their life or freedom (regardless of the reason). Hence, what does this article actually advocate? What does this right to live mean? How does this right to die relate? If there is a connection between the two rights, why do we impose criminal punishment for attempted suicide? The right to live and the right to die are separate rights but somehow related. One permits and one prohibits. An analysis of Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (an important case in relation to this subject) will elucidate the lines between the two rights.

---

[1] AIR 1981 SC 746;