Personality rights protect an individual’s identity—including name, image, and voice—from unauthorized commercial exploitation. While Indian courts derive these from Article 21, the absence of a codified law creates challenges in combating AI-driven deepfakes while safeguarding democratic free speech.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court's UAPA bail jurisprudence highlights the conflict between national security and personal liberty. While Section 43D(5) imposes strict statutory bail restrictions, courts invoke Article 21 to grant relief in cases of prolonged incarceration, ensuring constitutional rights prevail.
Click to View MoreThe MTP Amendment Act 2021 and Supreme Court rulings expanded women's reproductive rights in India. However, mandatory reporting under the POCSO Act and severe systemic healthcare barriers continue to restrict safe abortion access for vulnerable, young adolescents today
Click to View MoreThe 2026 Bill replaces self-identification with medical verification, sparking a constitutional clash. While the state aims to regulate welfare and prevent abuse, critics argue this violates the NALSA judgment and the fundamental right to personal autonomy under Article 21.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court directed the Centre to create a no-fault compensation policy for severe COVID-19 vaccine injuries under Article 21. This framework bypasses litigation, providing swift redressal through a Vaccine Injury Trust Fund. It ensures a socio-economic safety net, maintains public trust, and strengthens future pandemic preparedness.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court warned that mandatory paid menstrual leave, though supporting women’s dignity under Article 21, may discourage hiring and worsen India’s low female workforce participation. A balanced approach with flexible work, stronger leave policies, and destigmatization is considered more practical than a rigid law.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court's Harish Rana judgment confirmed the legality of passive euthanasia and the constitutional Right to Die with Dignity (Article 21). The ruling simplified the procedure for implementing a living will and emphasized the urgent need for Parliament to enact comprehensive end-of-life legislation to ensure ethical clarity, and balance individual autonomy.
Click to View MoreThe Ministry of Home Affairs revised Look Out Circulars guidelines, requiring statutory bodies like National Human Rights Commission and National Commission for Women to route law-enforcement agencies, preventing misuse and protecting the Article 21-based right to travel abroad.requests through
Click to View MoreThe recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India recognises access to menstrual hygiene as part of fundamental rights, linking it to equality, dignity, privacy, and the right to education. The Court held that lack of sanitary products and proper school facilities forces many girls to miss classes, which amounts to structural discrimination under Article 14 and a violation of dignity under Article 21. It directed governments to provide free sanitary napkins, functional and private toilets, safe disposal systems, menstrual hygiene support spaces, and awareness through school curricula, making menstrual health a legal and educational priority rather than a welfare issue.
Click to View MoreKerala’s decision to waive ₹18.75 crore in loans for Wayanad landslide survivors signals a shift toward financial rehabilitation. It addresses post-disaster debt traps, contrasts State welfare with rigid national frameworks, and highlights the need for catastrophe insurance and reforms to strengthen disaster justice and recovery systems.
Click to View MoreThe Supreme Court ruled that menstrual health and hygiene in schools is part of the right to life and dignity under Article 21. It linked poor MHM to inequality and school dropouts, directing schools to provide free sanitary pads, proper toilets, and awareness education to remove stigma.
Click to View More
© 2026 iasgyan. All right reserved
