ADM Jabalpur Case: A Brief Overview of the Controversy

 The ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla case (1976), known as the Habeas Corpus case, is one of India's most controversial Supreme Court judgments.

The Core Issue

During the Emergency (1975-1977), the Supreme Court ruled 4-1 that citizens had no right to challenge unlawful detention through habeas corpus petitions. The majority held that fundamental rights, including the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, could be completely suspended during emergencies.

Why It's Controversial

Judicial Abdication: The court gave unlimited power to the executive, allowing the government to detain anyone indefinitely without trial or judicial oversight.

Civil Rights Violation: The judgment legitimized the detention of thousands of political opponents and activists without due process during the Emergency.

Constitutional Crisis: It undermined the principle of separation of powers and judicial review, placing the state above the law.

Justice Khanna's Heroic Dissent

Justice H.R. Khanna was the lone dissenter, arguing that life and liberty were inalienable rights that couldn't be suspended even during emergencies. His principled stand cost him the Chief Justice position but earned lasting respect.

Later Recognition of Error

• The 44th Amendment (1978) ensured Articles 20 and 21 could never be suspended again

• Justice Bhagwati, who wrote the majority opinion, later apologized in 2011

• The Supreme Court overruled this judgment in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017)

Legacy

The case remains controversial as a cautionary tale about judicial failure during democracy's darkest hour. It demonstrates the importance of an independent judiciary in protecting constitutional rights and serves as a negative precedent that strengthened subsequent constitutional jurisprudence on fundamental rights.

Print Page