India's judiciary plays a crucial role in shaping the country's legal and constitutional landscape, particularly in the domain of human rights. The Indian Constitution provides a comprehensive framework for the protection of human rights, including the Fundamental Rights (Articles 12 to 35) and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP).

The Right to Equality and the Right to Life and Personal Liberty have been instrumental in the development of human rights jurisprudence in India. The Indian judiciary has been characterized by a progressive and activist approach towards human rights protection, with landmark judgments such as the Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) and the People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997) demonstrating the Court's commitment to the welfare of marginalized and vulnerable sections of society.

Indian judiciary occupies a vital space in the country's constitutional framework, particularly concerning the promotion and protection of human rights. Through its progressive interpretations and landmark judgments, the judiciary has not only safeguarded fundamental rights but has also played a crucial role in advocating for social justice and equality.

The Right to Life and Personal Liberty, along with the judiciary's commitment to iconic cases reflecting the aspirations of society, showcases the transformative potential of judicial activism in India. As societal challenges continue to evolve, the judiciary's role in interpreting and enforcing human rights will remain a cornerstone of India's democratic ethos, ensuring that the principles of justice and equality are upheld for all citizens.

Introduction
Human rights in India have roots that trace back to ancient texts like the Vedas, which emphasized equality and moral duties or Dharma. However, the modern framework of human rights was significantly influenced by British colonial rule. India's judiciary plays a critical role in shaping the framework of the country's legal and constitutional landscape, particularly in the domain of human rights.

Over the years, the Indian judiciary has emerged as a powerful force in the promotion and protection of human rights, often acting as a guardian of fundamental rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution. This role has not only contributed to the development of Indian jurisprudence but has also influenced global human rights principles. The Indian judiciary's approach to human rights is rooted in its constitutional mandate, judicial activism, and the evolving interpretation of laws in response to societal needs.

Judicial system in India has not only interpreted laws but has actively shaped human rights jurisprudence through progressive interpretations and landmark judgments. This article explores the transformation of human rights in India.

Development of Human Rights Jurisprudence and The Indian Judiciary:

• Constitutional Framework for Human Rights The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, provides a comprehensive framework for the protection of human rights. Part III of the Constitution enshrines the Fundamental Rights (Articles 12 to 35), which guarantees basic civil liberties to all citizens. These rights include:
  • Right to equality (Article 14)
  • Right to freedom (Articles 19-22)
  • Right to protection from discrimination (Article 15)
  • Right to freedom of religion (Article 25)
  • Right to constitutional remedies (Article 32)
  While the Fundamental Rights provide a foundation for human rights protection, the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) (Articles 36-51) lay down the idealistic framework for promoting social justice. While the DPSPs are non-justiciable, they guide the state's actions in promoting a welfare state, focusing on securing adequate living standards, health, education, and economic well-being. The Right to Equality and the Right to Life and Personal Liberty have been particularly instrumental in the development of human rights jurisprudence in India. Article 21, in particular, has been central to the expansion of human rights in India. Originally interpreted narrowly, the Indian judiciary has gradually expanded its scope to include various dimensions of life, such as:
  • Right to a clean environment
  • Right to health
  • Right to livelihood
  • Right to education
     
• Judicial Activism and Expansion of Human Rights The Indian judiciary, especially since the 1970s, has been characterized by a progressive and activist approach toward human rights protection. Judicial activism refers to the proactive role taken by courts in interpreting and enforcing rights, often extending beyond the literal meaning of the law and Constitution. One of the most notable milestones in this regard is the Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) case, where the Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21 to include the right to live with dignity. The Court ruled that any procedure depriving a person of their personal liberty must be "reasonable, fair, and just."
  
  This judgment established that the right to life included:
  • Right to privacy
  • Right to a clean environment
  • Right to legal aid
  In People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1997) (PUDR case), the Supreme Court interpreted the right to life under Article 21 as encompassing the right to livelihood, highlighting the Court's commitment to the welfare of marginalized and vulnerable sections of society.
   
• Human Rights in India: Expanding the Scope India's judiciary has consistently expanded the scope of human rights through progressive interpretations, recognizing not only civil and political rights but also social, economic, and cultural rights as fundamental.
  • Right to Education (Article 21A) In 2002, the Right to Education (RTE) was made a fundamental right under Article 21A, ensuring free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14 years. The judiciary played a significant role in ensuring this right was effectively enforced.
     
  • Rights of Children and Vulnerable Groups The judiciary has expanded human rights jurisprudence to protect children and other vulnerable groups. In Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that prisoners retain their fundamental rights, including dignity and life, even when incarcerated. Similarly, cases like PUCL v. Union of India (1997) have reinforced rights such as fair trial, protection from arbitrary detention, and the elimination of discrimination.
     
• 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

Challenges Faced by the Indian Judiciary:

Despite the considerable advancements that the Indian judiciary has made in the realm of human rights protection, there are still numerous challenges that continue to loom large and hinder progress.

1. Judicial Backlog and Delay
   One of the most urgent and significant challenges that the Indian judiciary grapples with is the enormous backlog of pending cases. This overwhelming accumulation leads to considerable delays in the delivery of justice, which is a cornerstone principle of any effective legal system. In the specific context of human rights, such delays can lead to prolonged suffering and anguish for individuals whose rights have been infringed upon.
   
   Furthermore, these delays can exacerbate the trauma experienced by victims, pushing them into a state of despair while they await resolution. While it is true that the judiciary has initiated various measures aimed at addressing this backlog, the overall pace at which judicial reform is occurring continues to be frustratingly slow and has not yet produced the desired outcomes.
    
2. Political and Institutional Pressures
   The judiciary frequently finds itself under considerable pressure from both political and institutional forces, particularly when handling cases that revolve around sensitive political issues or controversial government policies. These pressures can manifest in various forms, potentially undermining the judiciary's ability to function independently. Even though the judiciary in India has historically demonstrated a strong commitment to maintaining its independence, it is crucial that this autonomy is safeguarded in light of political interference. Protecting the integrity of the judiciary is essential not only for the court system itself but also for the broader goal of safeguarding human rights and ensuring that justice is upheld in a fair and impartial manner.
    
3. Inaccessibility of Justice
   Although the judiciary has handed down numerous progressive rulings that aim to protect the rights of individuals, the problem of access to justice remains a major concern that must be addressed, particularly for marginalized and disadvantaged communities throughout the nation. The legal process can often be overly complex, prohibitively expensive, and challenging to navigate for those without the necessary resources or support systems.
   
   This inaccessibility to justice creates significant barriers and undermines the realization of human rights for large segments of the population who find themselves unable to assert their rights due to these systemic obstacles. As a result, many individuals are left voiceless and without the means to seek redress for injustices they face.
    
4. Social Inequalities and Human Rights
   Deep-rooted social inequalities, which include pervasive caste-based discrimination, entrenched gender inequality, and significant economic disparity, continue to severely impact the enjoyment and protection of human rights in India. Despite the judiciary's important role in striking down discriminatory laws and policies that perpetuate these inequalities, there remains a daunting challenge when it comes to addressing the deeply ingrained social prejudices that exist within society.
   
   The effort to combat these long-standing issues requires not only legal reforms but also a fundamental change in societal attitudes and values. Achieving equality and ensuring the protection of human rights for all citizens necessitates a collective and sustained effort to dismantle the structures of discrimination that are so profoundly embedded in various aspects of life in India.

Landmark Cases:
Several key judgments have further propelled the development of human rights jurisprudence in India, addressing diverse issues ranging from labour rights and environmental justice to the rights of prisoners, women, and children.

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
   In the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court enunciated the basic structure doctrine, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, rule of law, and individual rights, cannot be altered by amendments. This judgment emphasized that human rights and fundamental freedoms are foundational principles in the Indian Constitution, safeguarding them from any infringement through constitutional amendments.
    
2. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)
   In this case, the Supreme Court extended the scope of the right to life under Article 21 to include the right to livelihood. The Court held that the right to life and personal liberty cannot be restricted to mere animal existence and must include the right to livelihood, especially for the urban poor. This judgment marked a significant step towards the recognition of economic and social rights within the framework of human rights.
    
3. Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
   The Vishakha case is a landmark judgment concerning the rights of women in the workplace. In response to the lack of legal provisions for the protection of women against sexual harassment at the workplace, the Supreme Court laid down comprehensive guidelines in the absence of specific legislation. This ruling represented a pivotal moment in the development of gender rights in India, demonstrating the judiciary's proactive stance on human rights for women.
    
4. Nandini Sundar v. State of Chhattisgarh (2011)
   This case highlighted the rights of indigenous people in India, especially in the context of the Naxal insurgency in tribal regions. The Supreme Court issued directions to prevent the violation of human rights by state-sponsored vigilante groups and ensured the protection of tribal communities' land rights and dignity.
    
5. Right to Privacy – K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)
   In one of the most significant recent judgments, the Supreme Court ruled that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. This judgment was a major victory for civil liberties and human rights, reaffirming the right of individuals to be free from unwarranted state surveillance and intrusion into their private lives. This case demonstrated the evolving nature of human rights jurisprudence in India and reinforced the role of the judiciary in protecting constitutional values.
    
6. Environmental Rights – MC Mehta v. Union of India (1987)
   The case of MC Mehta v. Union of India played a critical role in expanding the scope of human rights jurisprudence to include environmental rights. The Court's interpretation of Article 21 to encompass the right to a healthy environment reflects the judiciary's progressive stance in ensuring that human rights extend to sustainable development and ecological justice.

Conclusion
The Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in the evolution and protection of human rights, cementing its place as a beacon of justice in a vibrant democracy. Through its proactive stance and progressive interpretations, the judiciary has expanded the horizons of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, breathing life into the ideals of justice, equality, and liberty. Landmark judgments like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, and Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan reflect the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding human rights against both state and private encroachments.

However, challenges persist. Delayed justice, under-resourced courts, and occasional accusations of judicial overreach underline the need for reforms to maintain public trust in the institution. A robust, independent, and efficient judiciary is vital to ensuring that human rights remain protected in an ever-changing socio-political landscape. In conclusion, the Indian judiciary has significantly contributed to the development of human rights jurisprudence, standing as a guardian of constitutional values and a catalyst for social transformation. Its enduring commitment to justice reaffirms the faith in the judiciary as a cornerstone of democracy and a custodian of human rights.

Written By:

• Mansi Gugale
• Anushka Sahastrabuddhe