Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984), the Supreme Court recognized that bonded labour violates right to life and personal liberty under Article ______, and directed rehabilitation, release of bonded labourers as part of State's positive obligation.
- 14
- 19
- 21
- 23
Answer: 21
Bandhua Mukti Morcha (1984) bonded labour and Article 21: (a) Context: Petition regarding bonded labour in stone quarries of Haryana; issue of State's obligation to release, rehabilitate bonded labourers, (b) Supreme Court holding: (i) Bonded labour violates right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 (dignity, autonomy), (ii) State has positive obligation to identify, release, rehabilitate bonded labourers, (iii) Used PIL mechanism: Relaxed locus standi to enable public-spirited organizations to file for marginalized groups unable to approach courts, (c) Applications: (i) Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, 1976: Court directed effective implementation, rehabilitation schemes, (ii) Judicial monitoring: Courts periodically review implementation, direct compensation, rehabilitation for released labourers, (iii) Awareness: Legal literacy programs empower bonded labourers to claim rights, access justice, (d) Subsequent developments: (i) Rehabilitation schemes: State/Central governments implement rehabilitation packages (land, housing, skill training) for released labourers, (ii) Monitoring mechanisms: District-level committees monitor identification, release, rehabilitation of bonded labourers, (e) Rationale: (i) Dignity: Bonded labour violates human dignity, autonomy; Article 21 requires State to protect vulnerable groups, (ii) Positive obligation: State must take affirmative steps to realize rights, not just refrain from violation, (iii) Social justice: Releasing bonded labourers advances substantive equality, social transformation, (f) Illustrates transformative constitutionalism: Article 21 interpreted to impose positive obligations on State for marginalized groups; PIL enables judicial enforcement of socio-economic rights through State action.