Assignment for Legal Bites

Human rights and role of Indian judiciary

 The purpose of human rights jurisprudence is to humanise governmental entities so that

they may be held accountable for solely utilising authority for the greater good. As a
result, the judiciary has been a goal-oriented organisation to provide appropriate remedy
to the underprivileged sectors of society in order to relieve humanity degradation in the
Indian confraternity. The judiciary is an independent department of government that
delivers justice based on law and facts rather than gender and caste.

 Indian courts have frequently emphasised that human rights are typically a reflection of a
society's morals. India cannot just rewrite provisions from international human rights
treaties. These restrictions must be tailored to the needs and expectations of Indian
culture's underlying moral undercurrents.

 Human rights are the rights that a person has just because he or she is human. Humans,
Kant claimed, have intrinsic value that inanimate objects do not. Violation of a human
right would thus be regarded as a failure to cherish human life. Five of the oldest written
texts that address concerns about people's obligations, rights, and responsibilities include
the Hindu Vedas, the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi, the Bible, the Quran (Koran), and
Confucius' Analects.

 The judiciary is required by the constitution to protect citizens' human rights. The
Supreme and High Courts have the power to enforce these rights. The constitution's
articles 32 and 226 allow for redressal processes. An aggrieved individual may file a
direct complaint with the appropriate state's Supreme Court or High Court for the
protection of his or her fundamental rights, redress of grievances, and enjoyment of basic
rights. In such cases, the Court may issue appropriate orders, instructions, and writs of
Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo-Warranto, and Certiorari.

 In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, the Supreme Court interpreted and expanded the
right to life, deducing unenumerated rights such as "right to live with human dignity." To
make the presence of the fundamental right relevant and active, the Supreme Court
proposed the doctrine of "emanation." As a result, despite the fact that they are not
specifically specified in Part III of the Constitution, certain rights have been recognised
through court interpretations.

 The courts have relaxed the locus standi rule, which holds that only a person who has
been wronged can seek redress in court. The court now allows public-spirited individuals
to file a writ petition to enforce the rights of any other person or class if they are unable to
use the Court's jurisdiction due to poverty or other social and economic impairment. In
S.P., the Supreme Court issued its decision. Gupta v. Union of India and others
established that any member of the public may petition the court to enforce the
constitutional or legal rights of those who are unable to travel to court owing to poverty or
other constraints. To protest a violation of their rights, a person can even write a letter to
the court. Public interest litigation gives the community's most disadvantaged and
vulnerable individuals the ability to make basic human rights meaningful to them.
 Assignment for Legal Bites

 The judiciary has intervened in various situations to defend the rights of children. In the
case of Labourers working on the Salal project v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, the
Supreme Court held that children under the age of 14 are not permitted to be employed or
engage in the construction process. Several directives against child labour have been
issued by the Court.
 In the case of Public at Large v. State of Maharashtra, the Mumbai High Court saved
children from the flesh trade and issued an order outlawing and rehabilitating child sexual
slavery. Children are not only subject to sexual assault, but they are also sometimes kept
as bonded labourers, as was the case in People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v.
Union of India, in which the Supreme Court ordered the release of child labourers as well
as compensation. The Supreme Court's concern for children's rights did not stop there; in
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, it emphasised the need of compulsory primary
education in relation to the eradication of child labour.

 In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court upheld S. Homosexual
relationships between two consenting adults are a felony under Section 377 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter IPC). The Supreme Court reversed its prior judgement in
Naz Foundation v. Govt. Delhi's NCT, which formerly held otherwise.The Supreme
Court established a distinction between social and constitutional morality. It was the
Supreme Court's responsibility, as the nation's conscience, to protect the human rights of
even the smallest minority group. The Supreme Court emphasised that the ability to
detect and not suppress dissent is an important component of a democracy like ours.

 In conclusion there have been various further court decisions in which the courts have
protected the human rights of other sectors, such as criminalising marital rape, making
sexual harassment at work a crime, protecting the environment, the right to livelihood,
and so on. In most cases, the Supreme Court recognises one or more Human Rights as
part of our Fundamental Rights, and the government subsequently enacts legislation
addressing that specific issue. As a result, the courts paved the way for much-needed
human rights legislation in India.

 When a result, the court has repeatedly played an important role in the preservation of
people's human rights by widening the scope of rights and acknowledging new rights as
needed. The judiciary has expanded the scope of the right to life to include benefits
required to enjoy the right to live in dignity. Courts have upheld the rights of the people in
a number of situations, whether it is a right against jail brutality, a right to live in a
pollution-free environment, a right to health, a right to adequate pay for workers, the
safety of women at work, or compensation for rape victims.