Maneka Gandhi, an Indian citizen, had her passport impounded by the Indian government, which effectively restricted her ability to travel abroad. She challenged this action in the Supreme Court of India.
The case raised important constitutional and legal issues, primarily pertaining to the interpretation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The central question in this case was whether the government could curtail an individual’s right to travel abroad without providing a fair and reasonable opportunity to be heard.
The Supreme Court, in its judgment, significantly expanded the scope of Article 21 by emphasizing that personal liberty is not restricted to the mere absence of physical restraint but includes other aspects such as the right to travel abroad. The court ruled that a person’s right to travel abroad could only be restricted if the government can demonstrate a valid reason and if the person is provided with an opportunity to be heard and challenge the restriction. This decision, in essence, imposed procedural safeguards on any state action that sought to curtail personal liberty.
The Maneka Gandhi case has had a far-reaching impact on the interpretation and application of fundamental rights in India and has been cited in numerous subsequent cases to protect individual liberties. It has played a significant role in shaping the legal landscape in India by ensuring that fundamental rights, including the right to personal liberty, are safeguarded and protected from arbitrary government actions.