SYMBIOSIS INTERNATIONAL DEEMED UNIVERSITY

​ ​ADM ​ ​JABALPUR V. SHIVKANT SHUKLA

​ ​Case comment:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Submitted by

Tejal Jethwa

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Division D, PRN 19010324139, Class of 2019-24

SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, HYDERABAD

In

July 2020

Under the guidance of

Prof. Amish Abdullah
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139

Index:

1. Research objectives……………………………………………………………… 2
2. Research questions………………………………………………………………. 2
3. Research methodology……………………………………………………….….. 2
4. Abstract…………………………………………………………………………..3
5. Literature review………………………………………………………………….4
6. Chapterisation…………………………………...………………………………..4
➢ Introduction
➢ Historical background
➢ Facts
➢ Judgements
➢ Analysis
➢ Aftermath
➢ conclusion

7. List of cases……………………………………………………………………..5
8. References…...………………………………………………………………….5

1
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139

Research questions:

1. “​Whether, under Proclamation of Emergency after President’s order, can the writ of
Habeas Corpus be maintained in High Court by a person challenging his unlawful
detention​”​?
2. “​Was suspension of Article 21 fit under rule of law​”​?
3. “​Does detenu hold locus standi in Court during the period of Emergency​”​?

Research objectives:

“​The objective of study is to comment on the case in question and analyse facts, issues and
judgement on the case. One is determined to provide insights and analysis for the same​”​.One of
the objectives is to understand the aftermath for the same.

Research methodology:

For the research, the method of non-doctrinal research is used. The research​”​is based on
qualitative secondary research. It also involves web-based​”​research ​“​where numerous scholarly
articles are present and referring to them would be at ease​”​. ​“​Comparing all the articles
simultaneously would eliminate bias as well since every​”​precaution of ensuring facts are present
in the research will be taken​”​. The paper aims to analyse various distinguished papers on the
given topic and tries to interpret​”​themes.

2
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139

Abstract:

“​On June 25, 1975, the President, in the exercise of the powers conferred by paragraph (2) of
Article 352 of the Constitution, declared that there is a serious emergency for which Indian
security is threatened by internal disturbances​”​. “​On June 27, 1975, in the exercise of the powers
conferred by Clause (1) of Article 352 of the Indian Constitution​, the President declared that the
right of any person (including a foreigner) to approach a court for the application of his rights
conferred by Articles 14​, ​21 and ​22​”​.​“​The Constitution and all proceedings pending before a
court for the enforcement of the aforementioned rights shall remain suspended during the period
in which the urgency is proclaimed​”​. Black law’s dictionary defines emergency “as a failure of
the social system to deliver reasonable conditions of life”. ​“​The term emergency may be defined
as​” “circumstances arising suddenly that calls for immediate action by the public authorities
under the powers especially granted to them”. ​“​Article 352 of the constitution talks about the
national emergency which can be declared in case of war, external aggression and rebellion the
central government takes all the powers namely executive, legislative and financial​”​. ​“​During
national emergency except article 20 and 21, all other fundamental rights are suspended. The
president may suspend the right to move to courts by enforcing article 359​”​. ​“​Union government
can make legislation on state list items by article 250​”​.

“​The said case pertains to the time of Proclamation of Emergency by the then ruling government
of Indira Gandhi and Presidential order of the same was issued when the election of Indira
Gandhi was termed to be illegal​”​. ​“​The case arose out of contention that whether the right of a
person to approach the respective High Court gets quashed when his fundamental rights are not
given or suppressed, especially Article 14, and 21 during the emergency and enforcement of such
rights remain suspended for the period of Proclamation of Emergency in force​”​. ​“​The judgment
was delivered on April 28th, 1976 by the Constitutional bench of five judges including the then
Chief Justice A.N. Ray, out of which four were in favour of the suspension of such right and
liberty and one dissenting rejected such contention​”​. ​“​As far as majority of the judgment goes, it
was established that a person’s right to approach High Court under Article 226 of the Indian
Constitution for Habeas Corpus or any other writ challenging the legality of an order of detention

3
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139

at the time of Proclamation of Emergency remains suspended and that person cannot approach
any High Court for the remedy or get his right​”​. ​“​This case was infamously called as the Habeas
Corpus case. Till date, the decision taken by the Court holds badly on the ground of equity,
justice and good conscience​”​. ​“​The Latin term Habeas Corpus means​” “you may have the body”
“​and writ of securing a person’s liberty is called Habeas Corpus​”​. The paper aims to establish the
historical backgrounds, facts, judgement, analysis and the aftermath of the said case in detail.

Literature review:

“​As we require a​ ​complete outlook on the topic chosen, various studies have to be referred to for
a more enhanced understanding and information relevant to the area which is being researched​”​.
Habeas Corpus. (1977). ​The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-),​ ​68(​ 4), 571-582.
doi:10.2307/1142418 is studied to have a deeper analysis on the concerned case.​ A.D.M. 1975-77
and A.D.M. 1975-77, ‘A.D.M. Jabalpur Vs. Shukla And The Emergency Of 1975-77’ (India
Opines, 2017) accessed 24 July 2​020. ​is gives an overview of the subject in hand. ​Verdict
'violated' fundamental rights during Emergency , An Outrageous Emergency-Era Supreme Court
Judgment That Still Stands, Technically ​and​ Supreme Court regrets Emergency-era verdict a​ re
articles that are referred to get up to date facts on the case in question. Apart from this The
Constitution has been referred in order to get definitions of various articles and sections.

Chapterisation:

Following chapters have curated to have a deep insight into the case. Every chapter entails one of
core aspects of case comments. The chapters are as follows:

➢ Introduction
➢ Historical background
➢ Facts
➢ Judgements
➢ Analysis

4
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139

➢ Aftermath
➢ conclusion

List of cases:

● Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India

● Poona municipal corporation V. D.N.Deodher
● Bharat Kala Bhandar v. Municipal committee
● Indore municipality v. Niamatulla
● Dwarkadas Shrinivas v. the Sholapur spg. And wvg company Ltd and Ors.
● 975 AIR 865, 1975 SCR (3) 333
● 1972 AIR 963, 1972 SCR (2) 1014
● 1964 AIR 381, 1964 SCR (4) 797
● 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621
● 1950 AIR 27, 1950 SCR 88
● 1977 AIR 1027, 1977 SCR (2) 719

References:

1. Habeas Corpus. (1977). ​The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-),​ ​68(​ 4),
571-582. doi:10.2307/1142418
2. A.D.M. 1975-77 and A.D.M. 1975-77, ‘A.D.M. Jabalpur Vs. Shukla And The
Emergency Of 1975-77’ (India Opines, 2017) accessed 24 February 2017
3. M.P.Jain, “Indian Constitutional Law” Fifth Edition 2008, Wadhwa and Company,
Nagpur.
4. J.N.Pandey, “The Constitution Law of India” Forty Fifth Edition 2008, Central Law
Agency, Allahabad.
5. D.D.Basu, “Shorter Constitution of India”
6. V.N. Shukla, “Constitution of India”
7. Seervai, “Constitutional Law of India”
8. P.M.Bakshi, “Constitutional Law of India

5
​ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla :​Case comment 19010324139