ADM Jabalpur v Shivkant Shukla: Critical analysis

Abstract

Habeas Corpus is amongst from one of the most important cases which was well recognized by the name of ADM JABALPUR Case and is often termed as a black spot on the Indian Judiciary. This particular judgment marked serious doubts on the Supreme court as guardian and protector of the constitutional rights of the citizens of this country. Later, the judiciary has realized its fault in this judgment and made a vast change in the direction to encourage the protection of the fundamental rights of the individuals especially Art.21 of the Constitution of India and upholding the rights regime by introducing Maneka Gandhi v Union of India. Moreover, whatever ruling stated in Maneka Gandhi case by Justice P. N. Bhagwati is not the new law, in fact, it was already stated by J. Khanna, who has sacrificed his golden career for the fraternity of the institution and of course, for the nation. He maintained the dignity of judicial conduct and maintains a robust and independent judiciary and upholds the rule of law. Besides, over 40 years after the SC darkest hour, a nine-judge Bench in K. S. Puttaswamy v UOI (AIR 2017 SC 4161) condemned the decision in the infamous Habeas Corpus case. Justice Chandrachud, who, incidentally, is the descendant of Justice Y. V. Chandrachud expressly, overruled the ADM Jabalpur case. Finally, the judiciary has attempted to bury the darkest chapter of its own history.