1.3.4 Other Fundamental Rights (Unremunerated Fundamental Rights)A number of rights are not stated in the Covenant, are not even laid down in part III of the Constitution. In A.D M. Jabalpur V. S. Shukla the Supreme Court by a majority of four to one, held that the Constitution of India did not recognize any natural or common law rights other than that expressly conferred in the Constitution. Though the attitude of the Supreme Court has changed especially after 1978. The courts on many occasions by accepting the rule of judicial construction have held that regard must be paid to International Conventions and norms for constructing domestic law. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, Justice Bhagwati in the Special Bench for the Supreme Court observed that: The expression â€˜personal libertyâ€™ in article 21 is of the widest amplitude and it covers a variety of rights, which go to constitute the personal liberty of man and some of them have been raised to the status of distinct fundamental rights and given additional protection under Article 19. No person can be deprived of his right to go abroad unless there is a law made by the State prescribing the procedure for so depriving him; and the deprivation is effected strictly in accordance with such procedure. The following rights are contained in the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They are available to the citizens of India through judicial decisions, even if and though they are not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
- Right to travel abroad (Article 21): The right to travel abroad is a guaranteed right under Article 12 paragraph (2) of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In Sathwant Singh Sawlmey D, Ramanathan, Assistant Passport Officer, New Delhi, the Court held that the right to go abroad is part of an individualâ€™s personal liberty within the meaning of Article 21,
- Right to privacy (Articles 21 and 19 (1) (d)): This right is stipulated under Article 17 paragraph (1) of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In Kharak Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh it was held by the Supreme Court that the â€˜domiciliary visitsâ€™ is an infringement of the right to privacy and is violative of the citizenâ€™s fundamental rights of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21.
- Right against solitary confinement
- Right to human dignity
- Right to free legal aid in a criminal trial
- Right to speedy trial
- Right against handcuffing
- Right against delayed execution
- Right against custodial violence
- Right against public hanging
- Right to health care or doctorâ€™s assistance
- Right to shelter
- Right to pollution free environment
- Freedom of the press
- Right to know
- Right to compensation
- Right to release and rehabilitation of bonded labor
- Right of inmates of protection homes
- inducement or coercion of a child to engage in any unlawfulsexual activity
- the exploitative use of children in prostitution or other unlawful activity
- the exploitative use of children in pornographic performances and materials
1.4 Other Measures of Protection of Human Rights under Indian Law
- The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
- Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956
- Maternity Benefit Act, 1961
- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
- Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
- Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976
- Employment of Children Act, 1938 (Amended in 1985)
- The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986
- Juvenile Justice Act, 1986
- Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986
- Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987
- The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
- The National Commission for Women Act, 1990
- The National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992
- The National Commission for Safari Karamcharis Act, 1993
- The National Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993
- The Mental Health Act, 1993
1.5 Fundamental Duties and Human RightsPart IV(A) of the Constitution vests the Fundamental Duties of every Indian citizen (Article 51-A). This clause was inserted by 42nd Amendment 1976. The duties are to respect the Constitution and its institutions, to live by the noble ideals of the freedom struggle, to protect the sovereignty and integrity of India, to defend the country, to promote communal harmony, to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women, to preserve the cultural heritage, to protect and improve the natural environment, to have compassion for living creatures, to develop the scientific temper, to safeguard public property and abjure violence and to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity. In 2002 The Eighty- sixth Constitutional Amendment inserted a new clause (k) in Article 51(A) making it the duty of parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or as the case may be, ward between the ages of 6 and 14 years. In the subsequent years it appeared that parts III, IV and IV (a) of the Constitution are heavily depended upon the judiciary for their interpretation and application. The various â€˜reasonable restrictionsâ€™ clauses mentioned in Part III, Article 21, and the rarely used Part IV-A have given the judiciary ample scope for reviewing the administrative and legislative action. Infact, Article 21 has allowed judicial institutions to act as a catalyst in pushing the State to implement the DPSPs with respect to the â€œlife and personal liberty.â€
1.6 Directive Principles of State Policy and Human RightsThe non-enforceable rights in Part IV of the Constitution are mainly those of economic and social in nature. However, Article 37 makes it clear that despite being non enforceable it does not weaken the duty of the State to apply them in making laws, due to their fundamental nature. Additionally, the innovative jurisprudence of the Supreme Court has now read into Article 21 (the right to life and personal liberty) many of these principles and made them enforceable. Reading in nutshell we can find that they demarcate the duties of the State, i.e. encompassing securing a social order with justice, social, economic and securing for â€œthe citizens, men and women equallyâ€ the right to an adequate means of livelihood. (Article 38). They directdistribution of ownership and control of community resources to subserve the common good., prevent concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment , secure equal pay for equal work for both men and women, prevent abuse of labor, including child labor , ensure child development , ensure equal justice and free legal aid organize village democracies (Article 39). In Article 40, constitution sates the provision of the right to work, education and public assistance in case of unemployment, old age sickness and disability. Article 41 vests provision of humane conditions of work, whereasArticle 42 entails the living wage and a decent standard of life and so on so forth. Hence it can be witnessed that these directives aim to include the indispensable provisions for development of child and education for children amongst the other essential directives i.e. to provide for human rights and decent standard of living.
1.7 Political Rights and Human RightsIndia being the largest representative democracy in the world is based on universal adult suffrage, providing every Indian of at least eighteen years of age the right to vote. The Constitution of India provides for direct elections to the House of the People of the Central Parliament, i.e. the Lok Sabha and the State [Provincial) Legislative Assemblies, once in every five years.. The right to vote, the; right to contest elections, and the conduct of elections are all governed by the Constitution (Part XV) as well as special laws like the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 1.8 Judiciary and Human Rights The vanguard of human rights, the Judiciary is one of the three organ of Government in India. It performs this function by innovative interpretation of the constitution with regard to the human rights provisions. The Supreme Court in the case Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib declared that it has a special responsibility, â€œto enlarge the range and meaning of the fundamental rights and to advance the human rights jurisprudence.â€ The Supreme Court of India and the State High Courts have unequivocal powers under the Constitution to enforce the fundamental rights and it has liberally interpreted these powers. The major contributions of the judiciary to the human rights jurisprudence have been two-fold: (a) The substantive expansion of the concept of human rights under Article 21 of the Constitution, and (b) The procedural innovation of Public interest Litigation.
1.8.1 Expansion of Article 21Article 21 remains the core concern in our discussions of human rights and it is essential to read it in much details. Article 21 reads as follows, â€“ â€œNo person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law.â€ The expansion of Article 21 of the Constitution has taken place in two respects:
- The expression â€œthe procedure established by lawâ€ was interpreted in the case A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras in the year 1950, the very first year of the Constitution, the Supreme Court in, reflecting on the intentions of the Constitution-makers, held that â€œprocedure established by lawâ€ only meant that a procedure had to be set by law enacted by a Legislature. This phrase was deliberately used in Article 21 in preference to the American â€œDue Processâ€ clause.
- Three decades later, in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court noted that â€œthe Supreme Court rejected its earlier interpretation and holds that the procedure contemplated under Article 21 is a right, just and fair procedure, not an arbitrary or oppressive procedure.â€ The procedure, which is reasonable and fair, must now be in conformity with the test of article 14 â€” â€œin effect it has become a Due Process.â€ There is no doubt that the experience of National Emergency (1975-1977) prompted the court to go all out for vindication of human rights.
- Since Maneka Gandhiâ€™s case, every case of infringement of rights by the Legislature has undergone judicial scrutiny in terms of the new guideline laid down by the Supreme Court of India. Further, this case led to the establishing of the due process norm, which included rights like, right to claim legal aid for the poor and the right to expeditious trial etc.
- The judiciary interpreted â€˜the right to life and personal libertyâ€ to comprehend all basic conditions for a life with dignity and liberty.
 A.I.R. 1976 S.C. 1207 at 1293  A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 597  A.I.R. 1967 S.C. Delhi 1836  A.I.R. 1963 S.C. 1295  A.I.R. 1993 S.C. 645 at 733. Justice Sujatha V. Man3har, "Judiciary and Human Rights," Indian Journal of International Law (Vol. 36, Nc1.2, 1996): 39-54.  A.1.R .I981 S.C. 487 at 493.  A.I.R. 1950 S.C 27  A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 597   A.I.R.98.1. S.C . 746.  A.I.R. 1981 S.C. 928  A.I.R. 1989 (4) S.C.C. 286.