Discussion
In which case the Supreme Court of India held that UDHR was not formed part of Indian Municipal Law.
Answer: C
The case is A.D.M. Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976), on the key's reading.
In that habeas corpus case during the Emergency, counsel urged that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights be read into the Constitution. Beg J. rejected this, saying that such arguments amount to appeals to weave ethical rules into a Constitution that is the paramount law and itself embodies the rights, and that nothing conflicting with it could be enforced under any disguise. I read this in the reported judgment; the statement is a rejection of the argument rather than a sentence announcing that the Declaration is not part of municipal law, so the match is to the case's reasoning.
The other cases point the opposite way. Maneka Gandhi widened Article 21, and Vishaka (the case spelt 'Visakha' here) used international conventions to fill a gap in Indian law. Raj Narayan v. Union of India concerned a different question altogether. Khanna J.'s dissent in A.D.M. Jabalpur did cite the Declaration's Articles 8 and 9 for interpretation, so the point is about the majority's position.
Post your comment
Please log in or register to post a comment.
Examination Categories
- SSC Exams
- Banking Exams
- Teaching Exams
- Civil Services Exams
- Railways Exams
- Engineering Recruitment Exams
- Defence Exams
- State Government Exams
- Police Exams
- Insurance Exams
- Nursing Exams
- Other Government Exams
- NRA CET
- PG Entrance Exams
- Campus Placement
- MBA Entrance Exams
- CUET and UG Entrance
- Judiciary Exams
- Regulatory Body Exams
- Software Development