The sweep of the right to life conferred by Article 21 is expansive and far-reaching. It does not merely imply that life cannot be extinguished or taken away, as, for example, by the imposition and execution of the death sentence, except in accordance with a procedure established by law.

That is but one aspect of the right to life. An equally important facet of that right is the right to livelihood because no person can live without the means of living, that is, the means of livelihood. If the right to livelihood is not treated as part of the constitutional right to life, the easiest way of depriving a person of his right to life would be to deprive him of his means of livelihood to the point of abrogation.

Such deprivation would not only strip life of its effective content and meaningfulness but would also render life impossible to live. And yet, such deprivation would not have to be in accordance with the procedure established by law if the right to livelihood is not regarded as part of the right to life. That which alone makes it possible to live, leaving aside what makes life livable, must be deemed to be an integral component of the right to life.