Security of person

Liberty of a person is a precious right, which has to be resolved in favour of the accused being favourite child of law, and denial of same requires extreme compelling reasons.

Out of the legal rights, the right to liberty is placed on a higher pedestal, which is to be respected by all and sundry

This is because courts are the guardians of the liberties of the citizens

Even the worst criminal in society is entitled to legal safeguards, and his legal rights cannot be taken away on one pretext or the other

Article 4 of the Constitution also safeguards the rights of individuals to be dealt with following the law and enjoy the protection of the law with the further explanation that no action detrimental to the life, liberty, body, reputation or property of any person shall be taken except in accordance with the law

Article 14 of the Constitution inter alia safeguards the dignity of man and preserves the privacy of home and place of work

In this context, a guarantee has been provided that no person shall be subjected to torture or humiliation to extract evidence or compel him to make a disclosure or confession

Human dignity is a cherished and serene state in an individual's social and personal life

It encompasses being treated with respect and avoiding abusive and degrading treatment, whether in public or private

When a person is subjected to ill will, ridicule, disesteem, or contempt, his dignity is compromised

Dignity is inherent to every individual, bestowed by God as an inalienable right that deserves protection and promotion by the government and its officials

It serves as the foundation of society, from the dawn of civilization, and is the cause and purpose behind all social institutions

Consequently, all social institutions, governments, states, laws, human rights and respect for persons originated from the concept of dignity of a man or his personhood

Any attempt to undermine the dignity of a human being also undermines the dignity of human and the support on which an ordinary society is structured.

Word life is very significant as it covers all facets of human existence and a person is entitled to protection of life in terms of Art. 9 of the Constitution

State has to protect its citizens by providing adequate medical facilities and it is an essential part of obligations undertaken by Government in a welfare State

Government discharges its obligations by running hospitals and health centers, which provide medical care to a person seeking to avail those facilities

Preservation and protection of human life is thus of paramount importance

Government hospitals run by the State and medical officers employed therein are duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving human life and failure on the part of the Government hospital to provide timely medical treatment to a person in need of such treatment would result in violation of his right to life guaranteed under the Constitution.

Under S. 3 of the Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance, 1960, the authority which is issuing preventive detention order must satisfy itself that material/evidence produced before him is sufficient to justify the detention order, without it, the order would be violative of Art. 9 of the Constitution.

Article 9 guarantees security of a person and Art. 10 provides safeguards as to arrest and detention.

Investigation must be fair, transparent and judicious as it is the minimum requirement of rule of law.

Provisions of S. 173, Cr.P.C., are mandatory as their non-compliance constitutes violation of Arts. 4 & 9 of the Constitution.

Every convict and under-trial prisoner has a fundamental right to be treated humanely and with dignity at all times, even when he is incarcerated for the most heinous offence

Convict must be protected against all types of cruelty

Prisoners suffering from a serious illness and those who are old and infirm have a right to be considered for premature release

Jail Superintendents are obligated to report such cases to the Inspector General of Prisons who should submit them to the Provincial Government for appropriate orders

In extreme cases where the Code of Criminal Procedure places an embargo on the Provincial Government (like offences under Chap. XVI of the P.P.C.), it may forward the case to the President with a request to consider it for remission or commutation of sentence under Art. 45 of the Constitution

Eligible convict may also approach President directly under Art. 45 of the Constitution for relief.

Gender based violence impairs women's and girls' fundamental rights, particularly their right to life and dignity.

Right to electricity is a part of right to life, which includes right to quality of life, hence part of fundamental right of a citizen of Pakistan

To provide electricity to the citizen is the responsibility of a State, whereas, electricity service is part of essential services to be provided by the State to its citizens.

Right to liberty and dignity is also protected under Arts. 9 & 14 of the Constitution as is the right to fair trial under Art. 10-A

In the event that after a fair trial the accused is found to be innocent, there is no mechanism to offer restitution for his loss of liberty pending trial.

Where discretion is vested in the Trial Court for purposes of sentencing and the statute providing fine as an alternative to imprisonment as a punishment for the offence in question, any time that such accused spends behind bars would be in breach of his right to liberty guaranteed under Art. 9 of the Constitution

Accused is hauled up in prison pending trial, at which stage the presumption of innocence attaches to him, even if he is subsequently found guilty and punished by the Trial Court with fine, the State and criminal justice system would have no means to recompense for the loss of liberty inflicted upon him.

Appellants (neighbours) assailed approval granted by Environmental Protection Agency for construction of Multi-Storey School building

Validity

Plots which were purchased by the proponent were reserved for school

After functioning of school the flow of traffic would increase in the locality which would affect the environment but this effect was not quantified or ascertained

Such apprehended effect was not violative of fundamental right to life unless it was shown by placing incontrovertible material before the Environmental Tribunal that the same would lead to hazardous effects on environment and would seriously affect human living

Approval of project was granted by strictly complying with Punjab Environmental Protection Act, 1997 and regulations framed thereunder with conscious application of mind, considering all relevant material and attending circumstances

Project had neither contravened fundamental rights nor human dignity

Appeal was dismissed.

Article 9 of the Constitution guarantees the right to life and liberty and enjoins that no person shall be deprived of it save in accordance with law.

Courts have expanded the right to life over time and held that it includes the right to legal aid; the right to speedy trial; the right to bare necessities of life; protection against adverse effects of electro-magnetic fields; the right to pure and unpolluted water; the right to access to justice; the right to livelihood; the right to travel; the right to food, water, decent environment, education and medical care

Right to identity as concomitant to the right to lifeis protected under Arts. 9 & 14 of the Constitution.

Personal identity begins from the moment of conception and going beyond the information such as date of birth, encompasses his personal attributes like biographical data, physical traits and significant social relations, such as ties to family members, cultural or religion

Right to identity is associated with several other rights, e.g., the rights to a name, nationality, juridical personality, family and culture

Some legal experts consider it a part of the right of life while others posit that it is rooted in human dignity and thus fundamental and non-derogable.

Subsections (1) and (2) of S. 19 of the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance, 2000, specify a few circumstances when the National Identity Card is compulsorily required

Such include grant of passport, permit or other travel documents for going out of Pakistan and identification of a voter at various elections

Section 19(3) empowers the Federal Government specify any other purpose for which the production of any card issued as aforesaid shall be necessary

However, the need for the CNIC has increased manifold during recent years

Now almost every government and private organization requires CNIC from a person before they attend him

Not possible to get higher education, apply for a job, open a Bank account, get a driving license or arms license, get utility connections, purchase railway and air tickets, execute any instrument, stay in a hotel or lodge, appear in a court proceedings and enter in certain buildings and premises without production of CNIC

CNIC is essential for enjoyment of a number of fundamental rights, hence, a person cannot be deprived of it without due process.

Liberty of a person being precious right, which is also guaranteed under the Constitution coupled with the fact that if after suffering the incarceration in jail, the petitioner is acquitted, how he could be compensated for his incarceration, as there is no reparatory arrangement so far provided in any law including the Cr.P.C. to compensate him for incarceration in prison for years, while to the contrary subsection (3) of S. 426, Cr.P.C. provides that while computing the sentence of convict, the period during which this sentence was suspended and he was released on bail, shall be excluded from the total period of sentence, he has to undergo.

Petitioner was selected for recruitment against the post of Medical Officer being eligible candidate by the District Recruitment Committee and her name reflected in the original merit list prepared by it but she was not appointed

Validity

Undisputed merit list had created a vested right in favour of petitioner, which was required to be given due weight and regard as she had developed legitimate expectation to be considered for appointment

No valid reason and implicit justification was rendered for denying appointment to the petitioner

Impugned action was against fundamental rights of petitioner guaranteed under Arts. 9, 18, 25 & 27 of the Constitution

Constitutional petition was allowed and the respondents were directed to issue appointment letter in favour of the petitioner.

Petitioner claimed that the closure of a section of road by the respondents during peak hours of the evening for vehicular traffic had infringed his fundamental rights of dignity, movement, right to life and access to public places

Validity

Restriction imposed by authorities had not negated the right of movement rather it had regulated its exercise and the area still remained open and accessible for general public but only vehicular access was restricted for certain definite amount of time and pedestrian access through walking was available to the general public for that particular time

Freedom of movement was not infringed or denied in that limited area of sit out cafes rather the mode of moving freely through that specific portion of the area for specific amount of time was restricted only to the extent of vehicular access and not of the person himself

Petitioner had remained unable to point out any violation of fundamental rights, justiciable within the ambit of Art. 199 of the Constitution

Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly.

Liberty of an individual has been guaranteed by the Constitution besides the fact that speedy trial is inalienable right of every accused, therefore, even if S. 497, Cr.P.C., in ordinary course is not applicable, the broader principle of the same can be pressed into service in hardship cases to provide relief to a deserving accused person incarcerated in jail for an indefinite period.

Pakistan is governed by the Constitution as amended from time to time which is a blend of secular law and Islamic law as is made clear by both the Preamble of the Constitution and the Objectives Resolution at Art. 2-A which form a part of the Constitution

When the Constitution is read in a holistic manner it is apparent that the form of Government in Pakistan is one of parliamentary democracy based on the trichotomy of powers between the Executive, Legislature and the judiciary where checks and balances on each organ's powers are ensured by the other organs of the State

Constitution through numerous of its Articles ensures the independence of the Judiciary and the rule of law and the due process rights of its citizens as would be expected in any civilized society and Islamic welfare State

One of the key attributes of the Constitution is that it seeks to protect and safeguard the rights of the individual from misuse or abuse of executive power and does so by enshrining a number of fundamental rights which are found in Chapter one of the Constitution which aims to strike a fair balance in respect of legal and legitimate preventive detention of citizens in appropriate cases in the interest of the State based on sound reasons and prevent such detention being misused for ulterior purposes by the executive.

Liberty of an individual has been guaranteed by the Constitution besides the fact that speedy trial is inalienable right of every accused, therefore, even if S. 497, Cr.P.C., in ordinary course is not applicable, the broader principle of the same can be pressed into service in hardship cases to provide relief to a deserving accused person incarcerated in jail for an indefinite period.

Right to life is the most precious of all Fundamental Rights of the citizens protected by the Constitution and it is the duty of the State to ensure that such rights are protected (namely the practice of missing persons/enforced disappearance is put an end to) as Pakistan is a democratic country which is governed by the Constitution, which is also blended with Islamic provisions which absolutely prohibit such illegal actions

State was duty bound to protect its citizens

State has the power and ability to prevent such practices as missing persons/enforced disappearances and to pass appropriate legislation to such effect

High Court observed the onus rests on the Federal Government to put an end to such illegal practices which cause nothing but heartburn and misery to the citizens whose loved ones have gone missing in some cases for years on end

Such practice greatly undermine the rule of law and the people's confidence in the State to ensure their constitutional guarantees.

Denial of bail automatically becomes a punishment in view of (i) the broad category of offences that fall within the prohibitory clause, (ii) the limited discretion vested in Court in view of the language of S. 497(1), Cr.P.C., and the lax standard that applies to the prosecution to justify arrest, and (iii) the time it takes to complete trials

Such undermines the rights of an accused to liberty guaranteed by Art. 9 and pre-trial punishment without conviction prohibited by Art. 10-A and fundamental principles of fairness, due to courts required to only ascertain, tentatively, if the accused is "guilty" on the basis of a "reasonability" standard

Such assessment takes place at a time when the accused is behind bars and has no ability to fully defend himself as he does not have complete access to the material to be presented by the prosecution before the court to satisfy the "reasonability" threshold

Right to liberty in Art. 9 is subject to law

Language used in S. 497(1), Cr.P.C., creates a prescription by law which renders the right of liberty of a citizen accused of a non-bailable offence pending his trial largely meaningless.

Legislature has determined the scope of discretion vested in a court to release a person on bail who has been accused of a non-bailable offence

Legislature in balancing the interest of the State in prosecuting offenders and the rights of a person to liberty (till such time that he or she has been convicted after a fair trial) could have left only the most heinous offences within the prohibitory clause of S. 497(1), Cr.P.C.

Such would probably be in line with provisions of Arts. 9 & 10-A of the Constitution and the settled principle of fairness and justice that a person is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty

Legislature has not done so and has placed fetters on the right to liberty of a person who is accused of a non-bailable offence punishable for up to ten years in prison

Only discretion vested in the Court for purposes of bail in an offence falling under S. 497(1), Cr.P.C., is for the court to satisfy itself that sufficient grounds exist to support a belief that the person arrested is guilty of an offence he has been charged

Court cannot give the words of S. 497(1), and specially the word "punishable" used therein any meaning other than its ordinary textual meaning which inevitably means that given that punishment up to ten years imprisonment is prescribed in relation to a large number of offences, the persons accused of such offences are not entitled to bail as a matter of right.

Liberty of an individual has been guaranteed by the Constitution and to have a speedy trial is an inalienable right of every accused person.

Use of words such as disability, disorder, physically handicapped, etc. employed in different statutory rules and policy notifications/government circulars are directly in contravention to the constitutionally guaranteed rights under Arts. 4(4)(1) & 4(4)(15) of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 and the said unpleasant words sound unhealthy classification resulting mental agony to the people having different abilities

High Court directed the Government to do the needful regarding substitution of words "disability", "physically handicapped", "crippled" etc. with "differently abled persons" or "persons having different abilities" wherever it was written in rules and policy notification, etc. in order to mentally uplift people with different abilities in societal fabric and bring them at par with the general public.

Where allotment in favour of the petitioners' predecessor was cancelled without any notice, High Court observed that due process of law had not been adopted which was a gross violation of the constitutionally guaranteed Fundamental Right No. 19 i.e. Right to fair trial, Right No. 14 protection of property and Right No. 1 security of person

Impugned order was set aside and the writ petitions were accepted.

Issuance of such an order in slipshod and sketchy manner mocked the concept of better government provided in the Preamble of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974 as well as militated against the doctrine of administrative justice and due process of law besides flouted the principle of natural justice i.e. audi alteram partem

Writ petition was accepted and the impugned notification was set aside.

Issuance of such an order in slipshod and sketchy manner mocked the concept of better government provided in the Preamble of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution, 1974 as well as militated against the doctrine of administrative justice and due process of law besides flouted the principle of natural justice i.e. audi alteram partem

Writ petition was accepted and the impugned notification was set aside.

While Arts. 4, 9 & 10-A of the Constitution are enough to provide a foothold to the concept of provision of reasons in judicial, quasi-judicial and even administrative orders and decisions, Art. 14 of the Constitution, which speaks about the right to dignity, may also be compromised if reasons are not forthcoming in a decision or an order

Article 14 of the Constitution provides for protection of dignity and in case an order or a decision is passed without reasons then the said Article may also be invoked to attack such an order or a decision on the basis that the order or decision so passed treats and addresses a living person as an object or a non-living thing

Therefore, and arguably, the right to reasons may also be premised as a concomitant right of the right to dignity

Such is indeed arbitrary and condescending to have a persons' status redefined without an adequate explanation of reasons for such change.

Petitioners were aggrieved of the decision of authorities to conduct examinations of "O" Levels and "A" Levels being taken by its respective institutions

Contention of petitioners was that the other countries of the world due to the prevailing epidemic situation had given the facility of school assessed grades to their students but the petitioners were being denied said facility which was in sheer violation of Art.25 of the Constitution

Validity

Petitioners could not point out any discrimination since the authorities were undertaking examination not only in Pakistan but also in other parts of the world as well and therefore the questioned actions of the authorities could not be adjudged on the scale of discrimination and inequitable treatment

Provincial government had also issued the schedule for examination within the province, meaning thereby, no such exemption was given to all other students of the province studying in public or private sector

Fundamental Right of life under Art.9 of the Constitution envisaged that the authorities must chalk out all necessary SOPs for safety of students who were appearing in examination, convey the same to the students, which were binding on them being sovereign command within the meaning of Art. 5(2) of the Constitution and most importantly ensure that the SOPs were being observed by the students and those conducting examinations at the examination centers

Constitutional petition was dismissed

Test to determine whether interference in right to privacy was justified where same came into conflict with interest of community

Historical perspective, comparative jurisprudence, and nature of Fundamental Right to privacy, extensively examined.

Court can look into and evaluate the mala fide from the facts and circumstances of the case.

Petitioners sought direction to the police officials to provide necessary protection in the manner that no one would cause them harassment

Petitioners had contracted marriage by exercising their right of freewill

Validity

Major and sane persons, both male and female, had the right to contract marriage with their own free will guaranteed under Art.35 of the Constitution

Not only Art.35 of the Constitution but the very fundamental right guaranteed under Art.9 of the Constitution was violated where a duly married couple was compelled to separation through coercive measures by police or any other person

Under Art.29 of the Constitution it was not only the various organs of the State but persons performing functions in various organs of the State had also to perform their duties in the manner that promoted the Principles of Policy under Chapter 2, Part II of the Constitution, which included Art.35

Constitutional petition was disposed of with direction to the authorities to conduct themselves strictly in accordance with law and provide necessary legal protection of life, honour and property to the petitioners in the manner that no one would cause them harassment.

An individual has the right to liberty, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty and not to be subjected to pre-trial punishment

Society, on the other, has a collective interest in maintaining safety, affording citizens protection against crime and violence and to ensure that no one is allowed to obstruct justice

These can seem contradictory rights

Bail is denied in cases where the accused is a flight risk or is likely to engage in obstruction of justice if released on bail or is accused of an offence of such nature that his release creates a risk that he may engage in a repetition of the offence charged or that his conduct is such that releasing him into the society would subject other individuals within the society to the possibility of harm.

Subjecting a person to malicious prosecution could interfere with the right to liberty guaranteed under Art. 9, the right to dignity under Art. 14 and the right to be treated in accordance with law guaranteed under Art. 4 of the Constitution. Such prosecution would inflict financial hardship, litigation cost, mental anguish as well as loss of reputation on the person who was on its receiving ends having been falsely implicated in a matter.

Any action by the Government or any of its functionary depriving or restricting the liberty of a citizen without sufficient cause is not envisaged by the Constitution

Any such action taken by the Government or any of its functionary will not be immune from scrutiny of High Court in exercise of its powers under Art. 199 of the Constitution.

Section 19(10) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 stipulated and made it mandatory for the Special Court to conduct an inquiry in respect of deliberate absence of the accused

Trial Court, after declaring the accused as proclaimed offender, had proceeded with the matter in his absence

No charge under S. 21-L of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 was framed against the accused

Trial Court had not formulated the point for wilful absconsion of the accused in the main judgment nor the prosecution had produced any evidence in that respect

Complainant was aware of that the accused did not reside in the concerned district

Accused could not be said to have hindered the course of justice in terms of S. 21-L of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997

Accused was not convicted according to law because pre-requisites of fair trial were not provided to him and the procedure adopted by Trial Court was in violation of Arts. 9, 10 & 10-A of the Constitution

Case was remanded

Article 4 of the Constitution stipulates that every citizen, wherever he may be, and every other person for the time being in Pakistan has an inalienable right to enjoy the protection of law and to be treated in accordance with law

No action detrimental to life, liberty, body, reputation or property can be taken except in accordance with law

Article 9 of the Constitution commands that no person shall be deprived of life or property save in accordance with law

Article 10 of the Constitution provides safeguards as to arrest and detention

Rights guaranteed under Arts. 4, 9 & 10 are sacrosanct and are required to be jealously guarded by the Courts.

Right to life guaranteed under Arts.9 & 14 of the Constitution included right to live in a world that had an abundance of all species, not only duration of current generation but also for its progeny.

"Life" includes an action by the State to remove all threats likely to abridge such guarantees.

Dimensions and parameters of a competitive process for a permanent appointment and a contractual/temporary appointment are altogether different

Competition for a contractual/temporary employment is not as aggressive and competitive as competition for a permanent employment

Many vying for a permanent employment would not bother applying for contractual/temporary employment

Moreso when there is no representation in the advertisement inviting applications for contractual/temporary employment that the same would somehow transform into permanent employment

If a person employed purely on temporary basis is to be given a permanent employment without any competitive process it would amount to stealing a march on hundreds of thousands of able would-be applicants who did not apply for temporary/contractual employment, but would have applied had they known that the contractual employment would, without any further competitive process, turn into permanent employment

Conversion of a person's temporary/contractual employment without any transparent competitive process, would be a clear violation of Arts. 3 & 9 of the Constitution

Equal opportunity in public employments is a constitutional mandate

Principle of "each according to his ability to each according to his work" can only be achieved by appointing meritorious candidates in the public sector through strict competition

Such competition for a permanent employment in the public sector cannot be given a go-bye simply because a contractual employee, desirous of his employment being made regular/permanent, was given contractual employment through a competitive process

Equality clause enshrined in the Constitution is to be followed scrupulously by the public sector

Youth, burning the midnight oil to secure permanent employment in the public sector, would be let down and demoralized if the contractual employment is converted into permanent employment without a competitive process

Such relaxation would be a bad precedent to a large number of qualified people aspiring for permanent employment in the public sector.

State had responsibility to protect life and liberty of every person residing in its territory.

Contention of petitioner was that the housing and population census under Ss.2(c) & 31, of the General Statistics (Reorganization) Act, 2011 should include all classes of the population and by not enumerating persons with disabilities in the upcoming national census, the same was incomplete and violative of Fundamental Rights

Validity

Per Art.31 of the United Nations Convention On The Rights Of Persons With Disabilities, ratified by Pakistan, in 2011; an international obligation was cast upon Pakistan to collect appropriate information regarding persons with disabilities in order to formulate and implement policies to give effect to the purposes of the Convention

Lack of data and information on disability and situation of persons with disabilities at the national level contributed to invisibility of persons with disabilities in official statistics, presenting an obstacle to achieving development planning and implementation that was inclusive of persons with disabilities

Depriving persons with disabilities from being included and counted in the National Census would offend their welfare and future prospects as the State had no credible information regarding their population, hence, exclusion of persons with disabilities from Census (head count) was in violation of right to life and human dignity under Arts. 9 & 14 of the Constitution besides being discriminatory under Art.25 of the Constitution

High Court observed that having a general headcount of persons with disabilities was more important than having no information at all regarding the same, and the said mechanism would not upset the calendar of the upcoming population census and was workable

High Court directed that census codes, in machine readable formats, should include collecting information regarding disability along with gender and Pakistan Bureau of Statistics to ensure that the next population census included a special column relating to persons with disabilities along with various categories of disabilities

Constitutional petition was allowed, accordingly.

Civic amenities constituted a basic right of the citizens and said right had to be upheld on the touchstone of Art.9 of the Constitution.

Appellant's constitutional petition impugning conversion of an open space designated as a park to another use, by the authorities was dismissed, inter alia, on the ground that the Constitutional petition involved disputed questions of fact

Validity

Civic amenities constituted a basic right of citizens and said right had to be upheld on the touchstone of Art.9 of the Constitution

Authorities had no power or authority under law to convert use of the open space and raise construction thereon, as the same had been in continuous use as a park, and had been maintained as such

High Court observed that it had been established that the status of the area which was the subject matter of the constitutional petition was for use as a park and said position was reinforced by various orders of the High Court in previous rounds of litigation, as well as by the stance of authorities in the said cases

Nature and existence of the park was therefore an undisputed fact, and thus it was disingenuous for the authorities to now take a contrary position

Finding recorded in the impugned order regarding disputed questions of fact, was therefore not valid, as the nature and existence of the park had been established by judicial orders and statements of the authorities

Impugned order was set aside, and authorities were directed to preserve and maintain the open space as a park, which was not to be converted to any other use under any circumstances

Intra-court appeal was allowed, accordingly.

Petitioners, a married couple, sought protection of life, honour and property, on the ground that they were being antagonized and threatened by their relatives on account of their contracting marriage

Validity

Major and sane persons, both male and female had a right to contract marriage with their own free will guaranteed under Art.35 of the Constitution and tribal customs, social taboos and things done on account of barbarism had to yield to Constitutional commands, law and Islamic Injunctions

Article 9 of the Constitution stood violated when a married couple was compelled towards separation through coercive measures by the police or any other person

Article 9 of the Constitution inhered that a married couple was entitled to live together without fear or hindrance and if spouses were deprived of such right, then the same was a violation of said fundamental right

High Court observed that the duty of the police was to act in aid of the Constitution and the law and neither the police nor any other state functionary had any right to cause harassment to a married couple with a view to cause separation between spouses

High Court directed the police and other officials to conduct themselves in accordance with law and to provide necessary protection of life, honour and liberty to the petitioners

Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly.

Protection of environment is an inalienable right and perhaps more fundamental than the other rights, and the same emerges from the right to life, liberty and dignity under Arts. 9 & 14 of the Constitution

Right to life as enshrined under Art. 9 of the Constitution means a right to a healthier and cleaner environment

Environmental justice is an amalgam of the constitutional principles of democracy, equality, social, economic and political justice guaranteed under the Objectives Resolution, the fundamental right to life, liberty and human dignity given under Art. 14 of the Constitution includes the international environmental principles of sustainable development, precautionary principle, environmental impact assessment, inter and intra-generational equity and public trust doctrine.