Justice Deepak Gupta Emphasizes the Supreme Court’s Duty to Protect Fundamental Rights
Justice Deepak Gupta, in a recent lecture, highlighted the Supreme Court’s pivotal role in safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens. He emphasized that once the court determines something as unconstitutional, it should not hesitate in granting genuine relief.
Reflecting on the Supreme Court’s history, Justice Gupta praised several judgments that expanded the scope of fundamental rights. However, he also pointed out certain decisions that, in his opinion, failed the citizens. He cited cases such as National Investigation Agency v. Zahoor Ahmad Shah Watali, which interpreted UAPA bail provisions narrowly, Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India, which upheld PMLA provisions, and Zakia Ahsan Jafri and another versus State of Gujarat and another, which made adverse observations against activists like Teesta Setalvad. About these judgments, Justice Gupta remarked,
“These and there are a few other judgments where Court, in my view, failed to uphold the liberty of citizens.”
Justice Gupta expressed concern over the delay in deciding habeas corpus petitions. He nostalgically recalled a time when such petitions were given utmost priority, being addressed day or night. Nowadays, he lamented, these petitions often remain pending until they become moot due to the release of the detenu. He emphasized that even after release, a detenu has the right to understand the reasons for their detention. Citing the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Bharti Nayyar v. Union of India, he highlighted the court’s stance that a
“Detenu has a right to know why he was detained even for a single day and whether his detention is legal or illegal.”
Towards the end of his lecture, Justice Gupta expressed satisfaction with the ongoing hearings related to the dilution of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, emphasizing the importance of such cases that impact rights.
When questioned about the Supreme Court’s assertiveness in protecting rights, Justice Gupta responded,
“Supreme Court is not only an adjudicator of disputes; it is also the protector of human rights of the citizens. Ours is a unique constitution where we have an Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. Where if my fundamental rights are invaded, I have a fundamental right to go to the Supreme Court. Which other constitution has that? Does not that itself show that a duty is casted upon the Supreme Court to protect the fundamental rights of citizens.”
He added that while the Supreme Court doesn’t need to intervene every time a fundamental right is violated, it must step in when significant matters affecting a large number of people arise.
Concluding his thoughts, Justice Gupta quoted Charles Dickens, hinting at the mixed legacy of the Supreme Court’s judgments.
