Solutions
Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty is available to both citizens and non-citizens.
Its ambit has been expanded by the SC from time to time. The Article has undergone interpretations in various cases like Gopalan Case (1950), Menaka Case (1978), etc.
As formally enshrined in the Article 21 of the Constitution, no person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
The Article has undergone various interpretations in this regard.
In Menaka Case (1978), the SC ruled that that the right to life and personal liberty of a person can be deprived by a law, provided the procedure prescribed by that law is reasonable, fair and just.
In other words, it has introduced the American expression "due process of law". In effect, the protection under Article 21 should be available not only against arbitrary executive action but also against arbitrary legislative action.
Rajbala v. Haryana (2015), a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India strongly rejected the doctrine of substantive due process in India.
In cases like Ramlila Maidan Incident (2012) and Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), SC has repeatedly held that substantive due process and due process generally are a part of the Indian Constitutional Law under Article 21 of the Constitution.