INTRODUCTION
Environment and Right to Life are surely interlinked. Man is both creator and moulders of his environment, which gives him physical sustenance and affords him the opportunity of intellectual, moral, social, and spiritual growth.*1 Life on this planet somewhere depends on maintaining the balance between the ecosystem and the environment.
In India, the concern for environmental protection has not only been raised to the status of fundamental law of the land, but it is also wedded with human rights approach and it is now well established that, it is the basic human right of every individual to live in pollution free environment with full human dignity.*2 Life and livelihood are some of the fundamental aspects of human existence and hence somewhere their intensification is a fundamental human right.
PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT
The Indian Constitution, 1950 envisages within itself the provision of Right to Life under Article 21*3 and has mould it as one of the crucial rights.
Article 21 of the Constitution reads as follows:
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.”
The Constitution is not an inert but a living document that tends to evolve from time to time. Also, some specific provisions envisaged in the constitution are one of the major reasons for this evolution, one of the most crucial is Article 21. Article 21 is crucial for environmental protection and has gone through several judicial interpretations after the decision in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India*4 , which witnessed new developments and were added to the interpretation of the rights under Article 21. The periodical interpretation has made to strengthen the protection of the environment more viable under Article 21.
In Chameli Singh v. State of U.P*5, the court stated that, “The right to live guaranteed in any civilized society implies the right to food, water, decent environment, education, medical care and shelter.”
It is to be noted that if there does not exist a healthy environment, the fundamental right to life enshrined would render incoherent. Right to live in a healthy environment is an exclusive right under Article 21.*6 This concept of living in a healthy environment being a fundamental right was first evident in the Doon Valley case*7 , where the questions of environment and ecological balance were brought in the utmost consideration of the court. The protection of environment under Article 21 was further strengthened in the case of Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar*8, where the Supreme Court held that: “Right to live is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and it includes the right of enjoyment of pollution-free water and air for full enjoyment of life.”
It is to be noted from the perusal of the above-mentioned cases that protection of the environment holds a bright essence as a right under Article 21.
CONCLUSION
The brief outline suggests that the right to live in a healthy environment is essential and is considered as a fundamental right under Article 21 and the State is envisaged to perform all those methods which are essential for the protection of this right.
Furthermore, the right to healthy environment is fundamental human right implicit to right to life.*9
It is evident from the above cases that the judiciary has prevented the blatant violation of this right under Article 21 and has given a push to make this right worthwhile.
This Article is written by Anadi Tewari. He is currently pursuing his LL.B (Hons.) at University of Lucknow and he is in his second year.
REFERENCES
1. Judicial Activism to Judicial Adventurism for the Protection of Environment: An Analysis in the Context of Expansive Meaning of Article 21 of Indian Constitution, 24 ALJ (2016-17) 225 at page 225.
2. Chapter II, The Indian Constitution and Environmental Protection, page24:https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/76685/9/09_chapter%202.pdf accessed on April 18, 2020.
3. INDIA CONSTITUTION. Article. 21.
4.Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1978 SC 597 (India).
5. Chameli Singh v. State of U.P., (1996) 2 SCC 549: A.I.R. 1996 SC 1051 (India).
6. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, A.I.R. 1987 SC 1086 (India).
7. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra & Ors. v. State of U.P., (1985) 2 SCC 431 (India).
8. Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, (1991) 1 SCC 598 at page 604 (India).
9. A.P. Pollution Control Board II v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu, (2001) 2 SCC 62 at page 70 (India).
0 Comments