Fundamental Rights and DPSP in News: Key Supreme Court Judgments for UPSC Prelims 2026

Fundamental Rights and DPSP in India explains key concepts such as personality rights, privacy, digital access, right to die with dignity, safe roads, and access to justice under Article 21. It also covers preventive detention safeguards, essential religious practices, maternity benefits, and custodial protections. 

Important legal distinctions like police vs. judicial custody and furlough vs. parole are discussed to help understand constitutional rights and governance, especially for UPSC Prelims 2026 preparation.

Fundamental Rights & DPSP in News for UPSC Prelims 2026

This video explains important Fundamental Rights and DPSP topics related to recent Supreme Court judgments.

If you want to understand all important rights, key constitutional concepts, and detailed explanations for UPSC Prelims 2026, make sure to watch the complete video given here.

Key Fundamental Rights and DPSP in News for UPSC

India’s constitutional framework balances Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles of State Policy – DPSP (Part IV). Recent judicial interpretations have expanded individual liberties while defining limits on state power.

Personality Rights and Publicity Rights

The Delhi High Court recently emphasized the protection of an individual's personality and publicity rights.

1. Personality Rights

• Definition: Rights an individual holds over unique attributes like their name, image, voice, likeness, expression, signature, catchphrases, or distinctive style.

• Protection: Individuals control commercial or non-commercial use of their identity, especially when it leverages their public persona.

• Constitutional Basis: Right to Autonomy and Right to Dignity are integral to personality rights, falling under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This connection is very important.

2. Right to Privacy (Distinction and Connection)

• Definition: An individual's right to control personal information and protect it from public dissemination without consent.

• Key Cases:

• K.S. Puttaswamy vs. Union of India (2017): Declared the Right to Privacy an integral part of Article 21.

• Modern Challenges: Deepfakes are considered a breach of this right, invoking Article 21.

3. Right to Publicity

• Definition: Pertains to the commercial exploitation of a public figure's identity (e.g., name, image, signature). It prevents unauthorized commercial use.

• Legal Safeguards: Trademark Act, 1999 allows registration of names (e.g., Shahrukh Khan) to prevent misuse.

4. Posthumous Rights (After Death)

• Personality Rights After Death: No specific law explicitly states personality rights continue after death.

• Case Law: Deepa Jayakumar vs. A.L. Vijay (2019) ruled that personality rights, reputation, and Right to Privacy apply only during an individual's lifetime.

• Protection of Dignity: The Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act of 1950 protects against misuse of names or images of famous deceased personalities (e.g., Mahatma Gandhi).

5. Constitutional and Statutory Protections

• Constitutional Protection: Both Right to Privacy and Right to Publicity are rooted in Article 21.

• Statutory Provisions: Copyright Act, 1957 and Trademark Act, 1999 (Section 27 includes "passing off" provisions against unauthorized commercial exploitation).

Euthanasia (Right to Die with Dignity)

The Supreme Court has recognized the Right to Die with Dignity as part of Article 21, permitting passive euthanasia under specific conditions.

1. Definition and Context

• Euthanasia: Process where an individual suffering immensely from an incurable illness seeks to end their life.

• Supreme Court's Stance: Allows withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment for terminally ill patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS) with no hope of recovery, ensuring a dignified death.

2. Types of Euthanasia

• Active Euthanasia: Administering a lethal substance to cause death. This is not permitted in India.

• Passive Euthanasia: Withdrawing life-sustaining treatment, allowing the illness to take its natural course. This is allowed in India for terminally ill patients.

3. Conditions for Passive Euthanasia

• Patient must be terminally ill with no scope of recovery.

• Life-sustaining treatment only prolongs suffering.

4. Landmark Judgment

• Common Cause vs. Union of India (2018): Declared the Right to Die with Dignity a fundamental right under Article 21, allowing passive euthanasia and introducing Living Wills.

5. Living Wills

• Definition: A legal document made by an individual while competent, stating their wish to refuse medical treatment or receive passive euthanasia if they become terminally ill and unable to communicate.

Protection of Constitutional Rights During Arrest and Detention: Articles 21 & 22(1)

The Supreme Court emphasizes protecting Constitutional Rights under Article 21 and Article 22(1) during arrest or detention.

1. Article 21: Right to Life and Personal Liberty

• "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." This means any restriction on liberty must follow legal procedures strictly.

2. Article 22: Protection Against Arrest and Detention

• Article 22(1) guarantees arrested persons the right to be informed of grounds of arrest "as soon as may be" and the right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of their choice.

3. Distinction: Detention vs. Arrest

• Detention: Temporary holding, often based on suspicion.

• Arrest: Formal legal procedure leading to longer custody, potentially for punishment.

Right to Digital Access

The Supreme Court recognized the Right to Digital Access as integral to Article 21, emphasizing digital inclusion.

1. Constitutional Basis and Key Case

• Amar Jain vs. Union of India: The Supreme Court declared inclusive digital access part of Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty), linking it to essential services like governance, education, and healthcare.

2. Definition of Digital Access

• The right to use digital technologies (internet, computers, smartphones, software, online services) to access government facilities and online resources.

3. Substantive Equality

• The State must bridge the digital divide for marginalized sections, similar to affirmative action, ensuring a level playing field.

4. Global Recognition

• The UN Human Rights Council recognized Right to Internet Access as a human right, later approved by the UN in 2016.

5. Significance in India

• Crucial for millions relying on digital infrastructure. As a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, internet access is vital for empowering physically challenged individuals.

• Ensures digital inclusion and fulfills Right to Life with Dignity and Liberty.

6. Key Judicial Decisions on Digital Rights

• Anuradha Bhasin vs. Union of India (2020): Internet access protected under Article 19(1)(a) (Freedom of Speech and Expression) and Article 19(1)(g) (Right to Trade and Profession).

• Fahima Shirin vs. State of Kerala: Established Right to Internet Access as a fundamental right under Article 21, linked to Right to Education and Right to Privacy.

Right to Safe and Motorable Roads

The Supreme Court elevated the Right to Safe and Motorable Roads to a part of Article 21.

1. Nature and Importance

• Human Dignity and Safety: Essential for protecting dignity and ensuring public safety.

• Risk Mitigation: Poor roads increase accident risks, directly threatening life.

2. Constitutional Basis

• Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty): Unsafe roads endanger life, making their maintenance part of this right.

• State's Obligation: The State has a clear obligation to construct and maintain road infrastructure.

• Article 19(1)(d) (Freedom of Movement): Implicitly requires a safe environment for free movement.

3. Landmark Case

• Ummari Pratapur Tollway Pvt. Ltd. vs. Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Ltd. affirmed the State's responsibility and declared this right fundamental under Article 21.

Right to Access Justice: Not Absolute

The Supreme Court clarified that the Right to Access Justice, though fundamental, is not an absolute right and has limitations.

1. Components of Right to Access Justice

This right includes access to judicial proceedings, fair trials, proper legal representation, and the promotion and protection of rights.

2. Supreme Court's Stance and Context

The Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP), explaining that while access to justice is a fundamental right under Article 21, it is not absolute. The Court can exercise discretion, especially if the matter lacks serious legal issues or constitutes an abuse of process.

3. Special Leave Petition (SLP) - Article 136

• Definition: An extraordinary discretionary power of the Supreme Court under Article 136 to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment of any court or tribunal (except military).

• Nature: It is discretionary; the SC can accept or reject an SLP if it involves a substantial legal issue or perceived injustice.

4. Nature of Right to Justice

• Element of Rule of Law: A cornerstone promoting transparency, a fair legal system, and protection of rights.

5. Constitutional Provisions Promoting Justice

• Preamble: Promotes socio-economic and political justice.

• Implicit in Fundamental Rights: Article 14 (Equality before Law), Article 21 (Right to Life), Article 32 (Constitutional Remedies).

• Part IV (DPSP): Article 39A mandates free legal aid (implemented by NALSA).

• Writ Jurisdiction:

• Article 32: Supreme Court issues writs for Fundamental Rights.

• Article 226: High Courts have broader writ jurisdiction for both Fundamental and other legal rights.

• (Memory Tip: High Courts (Article 226) have broader writ powers than the Supreme Court (Article 32) because they can issue writs for violations of both Fundamental Rights and other legal rights, whereas the Supreme Court's Article 32 power is primarily for Fundamental Rights.)

6. Landmark Rulings on Right to Access Justice

• Anita Kushwaha vs. Pushpa Sadan (2016): Affirmed Right to Access Justice under Article 21 and Article 14, outlining essential elements: effective mechanisms, physical accessibility, speedy disposal, and affordable justice.

• Baddikota Subbarao vs. K. Parasaran (1996): Clarified that this right does not entitle unlimited judicial review or repeated appeals on the same grounds. New evidence is required to challenge previous judgments, ensuring judicial finality.

Right to Safe and Accessible Footpaths as a Constitutional Right

The Supreme Court declared the Right to Safe and Accessible Footpaths a Fundamental Right under Article 21, particularly for persons with disabilities.

1. Supreme Court Directions

• Right to Life (Article 21): Safe and accessible footpaths are integral to this right.

• State Responsibility: States and UTs must maintain proper footpaths, supporting initiatives like "Accessible India" and ensuring unobstructed spaces.

Maternity Leaves: Part of Reproductive Rights

The Supreme Court declared maternity leave an integral part of women's reproductive rights and maternity benefits.

Maternity Leave Policy

• Definition: Paid leave for pregnant employees before and after childbirth.

Constitutional Basis

• Article 42 (DPSP) mandates the state to make provisions for just work conditions and maternity relief, supporting human reproduction and a woman's dignified life.

Legal Framework

• Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 (amended 2017):

• Purpose: Ensures job protection and financial support for pregnant women.

• Applicability: Organizations with 10 or more employees.

• Key Provisions: 26 weeks paid leave for first two children, 12 weeks for adoption (child <3 months), crèche facility if 50+ employees.

Benefits of Maternity Leave

Ensures job protection, reinstatement, paid leave, and overall security and safety for women in the workforce.

Reproductive Rights (as Human Rights)

• Definition: Woman's fundamental right to control her health and sexual activities, with reproductive well-being paramount.

• Legal Rights: Include access to contraception, abortion, fertility treatment, comprehensive reproductive healthcare, and information about one's reproductive body.

Habeas Corpus and National Security Act (NSA)

The writ of Habeas Corpus is an important writ ensuring protection against unlawful detention, exemplified by cases under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980.

Legal Framework of NSA

• NSA 1980, Section 3: Empowers Central and State Governments to preventively detain if there's a perceived threat to public order, national security, India's foreign relations, or essential supplies and services.

• Detention Duration: Up to 12 months, subject to review.

Judicial Safeguards and Review

The Supreme Court emphasizes NSA use only in rarest of rare cases as it impacts Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21).

• Judicial Review (Three Factors): Courts examine:

1. Subjective Satisfaction: Grounds are relevant, not arbitrary/fraudulent.

2. Irrelevant/Remote Considerations: No fabricated reasons or conspiracy.

3. Arbitrariness/Malice: No ill-will from authorities; malice halts detention.

Overarching Principle

Prevent misuse of preventive detention for punitive purposes. A crucial balance between national/societal security and individual liberty is sought.

Habeas Corpus (Detailed)

• Constitutional Provisions: Article 32 (SC writ jurisdiction for Fundamental Rights), Article 226 (High Courts' broader writ jurisdiction).

• Purpose: Curb arbitrary detention.

• Meaning: Latin for "To have the body of".

• Procedure: Arrested person must be produced before a magistrate promptly (within 24 hours) to determine legality of arrest.

• Function: Fundamental protection for personal liberty, preventing arbitrary state action.

• Scope: Applies to detention by both public authorities and private individuals/entities.