Decoding The Judgement on Sallekhana Santhara of The Rajasthan High Court

SR No.: 250435
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: C Devkumar Jain
Publisher: C Devkumar Jain
Publication Year: 2015
Total Pages: 25
Language: English
Classification: Article
File Size: 671 KB

Page 16

Art.25 of the Constitution. The impugned Act, however does not come within the saving provisions embodied in cl.(2) of Art.25. As the Act invalidates excommunication on any ground whatsoever, including religious grounds, it must be held to be in clear violation of the right of the Dawoodi Borha community under Art.26(b) of the Constitution. As the right guaranteed by Art.25(1) is not confined to freedom of conscience in the sense of the right to hold a belief and to propagate that belief, but includes the right to the practice of religion, the consequences of that practice must also bear the same complexion and be the subject of like guarantee. It is not as if the impugned enactment saves only the civil consequences of an excommunication not interfering with the other consequences of an excommunication falling within, the definition. On the other hand, it would be correct to say that the Act is concerned with excommunication which might have religious significance but which also operate to deprive persons of their civil rights."
35
35. In Gian Kaur V/s State of Punjab (supra), the Very sticky ground to argue for provisions Supreme Court disagreeing with the reasons under Art 21 but there are hopes for an given in P.Rathinam's case (supra) observed in intelligent interpreter of Law. paras 21 to 25 as follows:
"21. ..... In those decisions it is the negative aspect of the right that was invoked for which no positive or overt act was required to be done by implication. This difference in the nature of rights has to be borne in mind when making the comparison for the application of this principle. 22. ...... Article 21 is a provision guaranteeing protection of life and personal liberty and by no stretch of imagination can extinction of life' be read to be included in protection of life!. Whatever may be the philosophy of permitting a person to extinguish his life by committing suicide, we find it difficult to construe Article 21 to include within it the right to die' as a part of the fundamental right guaranteed therein. 'Right to life is a natural right embodied in Article 21 but suicide is an unnatural termination or