The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, stands as a landmark document affirming fundamental human rights. It encapsulates universal principles that safeguard individual freedoms, dignity, and equality. As a foundational document, the UDHR profoundly influenced the development of international and domestic laws worldwide, including India's constitutional and statutory frameworks. This article explores the UDHR's salient features, its reflection in the Indian Constitution, relevant statutes, and significant Supreme Court of India judgments citing the UDHR's principles.

Introduction
The UDHR emerged from the ashes of World War II, establishing a shared vision for human rights. Although not legally binding, its moral and ethical authority has inspired constitutions, including India's, and shaped global human rights jurisprudence. The Indian Constitution, especially in its Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV), mirrors the UDHR's core values. The Supreme Court of India, in several notable judgments, has referred to the UDHR as persuasive authority when interpreting constitutional and statutory rights, illustrating the UDHR's enduring relevance.

• Universality and Inalienability of Rights The UDHR affirms that human rights are universal and belong to all individuals regardless of nationality, race, gender, or religion. This universality is echoed in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law, and Article 21, which upholds the right to life and personal liberty for all persons. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, the Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21 to include dignity and personal liberty, reflecting the UDHR's universal approach to rights.
   
• Equality and Non-Discrimination The UDHR asserts the principle of non-discrimination in Article 2, which prohibits distinctions on grounds such as race, color, sex, language, or religion. This principle aligns with Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution, which collectively prohibit discrimination and ensure equal opportunity. The case of State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, AIR 1952 SC 75, illustrates the Indian judiciary's commitment to ensuring non-discriminatory laws, drawing from universal human rights norms.
   
• Right to Life, Liberty, and Security of Person Article 3 of the UDHR enshrines the right to life, liberty, and personal security, forming the bedrock of human rights protections. In India, this is mirrored by Article 21 of the Constitution, interpreted broadly to encompass rights such as privacy and health. The landmark judgment in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4161, expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to privacy, underscoring the UDHR's influence.
   
• Freedom from Torture and Degrading Treatment Article 5 of the UDHR prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment. In India, this principle is reflected in Article 21 and further supported by Article 20(3), which protects against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court, in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 610, laid down guidelines to prevent custodial torture, thus incorporating the UDHR's standards on humane treatment into Indian jurisprudence.
   
• Right to Fair Trial Article 10 of the UDHR grants the right to a fair and public hearing by an impartial tribunal. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution has been interpreted to include the right to a fair trial as part of the right to life and personal liberty. In Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, AIR 1979 SC 1369, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for speedy trials, reinforcing fair trial rights and echoing the UDHR's mandate for justice and due process.
   
• Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion The UDHR's Article 18 protects freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Article 25 of the Indian Constitution upholds this principle, allowing individuals the freedom to practice and propagate their religion. The Supreme Court, in Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala, AIR 1987 SC 748, safeguarded students' right to refrain from saluting the national flag due to religious beliefs, underscoring the protection of religious freedom in line with the UDHR.
   
• Freedom of Opinion and Expression Article 19 of the UDHR affirms freedom of opinion and expression, a right echoed in Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, AIR 2015 SC 1523, the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, recognizing freedom of speech as integral to democracy, inspired by universal human rights principles.
   
• Right to Work and Economic Security The UDHR recognizes the right to work, fair remuneration, and social security in Articles 23 and 25. These socio-economic rights find expression in the Directive Principles of State Policy under Articles 39, 41, and 43 of the Indian Constitution. Although non-justiciable, these principles guide the state in creating conditions for the right to work, as seen in cases like Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1993 SC 2178, where the Supreme Court linked education to the right to livelihood.
   
• Impact of the UDHR on Indian Jurisprudence The UDHR has left an indelible impact on Indian legal thought and practice. Indian courts often draw upon the UDHR and related international covenants as interpretative guides, especially where domestic laws are silent or ambiguous. The Supreme Court has consistently employed the UDHR as a source of moral and legal inspiration, bridging domestic and international human rights norms.
   
• Noteworthy Case Laws Reflecting UDHR Principles in India
  • Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011 The Supreme Court, invoking the UDHR and Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), laid down guidelines to protect women from workplace harassment, affirming the UDHR's emphasis on human dignity and equality.
     
  • National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) v. Union of India, AIR 2014 SC 1863 Upholding the dignity and rights of the transgender community, the Supreme Court acknowledged the UDHR's values of equality and non-discrimination. The judgment underscored the importance of treating all individuals with respect and dignity, as envisioned in the UDHR.
     
  • Shabnam v. Union of India, AIR 2015 SC 222 This case, concerning the rights of death row convicts, saw the Supreme Court emphasize humane treatment in light of UDHR principles, reiterating the right to dignity even for those on death row.

Conclusion
The UDHR's principles, while not binding, have exerted a profound influence on India's legal and constitutional framework. By embedding the UDHR's ideals within its Constitution and interpreting fundamental rights expansively, India demonstrates its commitment to universal human rights. The Supreme Court's reliance on the UDHR in landmark rulings reinforces the document's status as a vital, enduring touchstone in the quest for justice and human dignity. As the UDHR continues to inspire judicial innovation and social progress, its salience in Indian jurisprudence reaffirms the timeless relevance of universal human rights.