In the end, Maneka Gandhi did not in fact get her passport. But we end this year’s introspection into constitutional matters with a landmark case: Menaka Gandhi vs. Union of India, 1977. Gandhi’s passport was impounded in ‘public interest’. While this followed statutory regulations, that’s the Passport Act, 1967, the question was, did this conform to natural justice? The Longest Constitution examines what due process really means, as well as look at why 1971 was a year that set several things into motion, such as the passage of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971, a tool for the government during Emergency, as well as the year when Raj Narain filed a petition challenging Indira Gandhi’s election in the Allahabad High court.

Reading material:

On electoral malpractices and Emergency:

• Bhushan, Prashant, 2017, The Case that Shook India: the verdict that led to the Emergency, New Delhi: Penguin Random House.
• Austin, Granville, 2003, Working a Democratic Constitution: The Indian Experience, (OUP: New Delhi).

On preventive detention laws and MISA:

• Singh, Ujjwal Kumar, 2007, The State, Democracy and Anti-Terror Laws in India, (New Delhi: Sage Publications).

On Maneka Gandhi and due process:

• Chandrachud, Abhinav, 2016, ‘Due Process’, in Choudhry, Sujit (et al), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).
• Surendranath, Anup, 2016, ‘Life and Personal Liberty, in Choudhry, Sujit (et al), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

You can follow Priya on social media:

Instagram: (https://www.instagram.com/thelongestconstitution_/ )

Twitter: (https://twitter.com/fundamentallyp )

Linkedin: ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-mirza-73666310/ )

Do follow IVM Podcasts on social media.

We are @IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram.

Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Gaana, JioSaavan, Amazon Music

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The fifth parliamentary elections of India in 1971, set into motion a series of events that shaped the nation and the constitution. While campaigning, political parties promised voters that the constitution would be amended, a clear indicator that the Supreme Court’s striking down of parliamentary laws, such as in the Bank Nationalisation case (1970) and the privy purse case (1970) was being seen as an obstacle to a better India. This episode of The Longest Constitution looks at the constitutional provisions for constitutional amendments. We also look at the fate of thousands of Indians since 1962, when the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of sedition. Finally, we look at the expansion of Article 21 - that's the right to personal liberty and life when a convict on a death sentence protested against being placed in solitary confinement.

Further reading:

On Sedition:

• https://sedition.article-14.com/
• Bhatia, Gautam, 2016, Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Free Speech under the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

On Article 21:

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/162242/
• Surendranath, Anup, 2016, ‘Life and Personal Liberty, in Choudhry, Sujit (et al), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

On the 1971 elections and constitutional amendments:

• Austin, Granville, 2003, Working a Democratic Constitution: The Indian Experience, (OUP: New Delhi).
• Khosla, Madhav, 2016, ‘Constitutional Amendment’, in Choudhry, Sujit (et al), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

You can follow Priya on social media:

Instagram: (https://www.instagram.com/thelongestconstitution_/ )

Twitter: (https://twitter.com/fundamentallyp )

Linkedin: ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-mirza-73666310/ )

You can listen to this and other awesome shows on the IVM Podcasts app on Android: https://ivm.today/android or iOS: https://ivm.today/ios, or any other podcast app. You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featured

Do follow IVM Podcasts on social media.

We are @IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram.

Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Gaana, JioSaavan, Amazon Music

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees every person the right to life or personal liberty. But what good is such a right if it means being under surveillance and subjected to domiciliary visits at night? This episode of The Longest Constitution looks at how courts interpreted Article 21. Just as a reminder: in the AK Gopalan case, the state upheld the preventive detention law under which Gopalan was detained. What happened though when Kharak Singh challenged the UP police laws which authorized his surveillance. We also continue in our investigations into the privy purse and what the Supreme Court decided in the matter.

On the privy purse:

• Austin, Granville, 2003, Working a Democratic Constitution: The Indian Experience, (OUP: New Delhi).

On sedition:

• Bhatia, Gautam, 2016, Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Free Speech under the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

On Kharak Singh and Article 21:

• Surendranath, Anup, 2016, ‘Life and Personal Liberty, in Choudhry, Sujit (et al), The Oxford Handbook of the Indian Constitution, (New Delhi: OUP).

You can follow Priya on social media:

Instagram: (https://www.instagram.com/thelongestconstitution_/ )

Twitter: (https://twitter.com/fundamentallyp )

Linkedin: ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/priya-mirza-73666310/ )

You can listen to this and other awesome shows on the IVM Podcasts app on Android: https://ivm.today/android or iOS: https://ivm.today/ios, or any other podcast app. You can check out our website at https://shows.ivmpodcasts.com/featured

Do follow IVM Podcasts on social media.

We are @IVMPodcasts on Facebook, Twitter, & Instagram.

Follow the show across platforms: Spotify, Google Podcasts, Apple Podcasts, Gaana, JioSaavan, Amazon Music

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.