Though there is a special legislation for the protection of human rights in India it is true that the human rights jurisprudence developed and has been developing by Indian Judiciary at its best and in great manner.

A Human right is not what someone gives you; it’s what no one take from you. - Ramsey Clark

Human rights, as the term is most commonly used, are the rights that every human being is entitled to enjoy and to have protected. This notion of Human Rights is a gift of contemporary human thought to culture and civilization of the present era as rightly said by Shirin Ebadi [2]. Everyone knows that Human rights are those rights which are essential for the survival of humans and their life, but no one knows exact origin of concept of Human rights.

Simply an ordinary prudent man says that the concept of human right began at the start of the civilization on this earth. From the history and experts opinion at the beginning of human history man struggled for his existence against nature (where other man is also a part and parcel) and for protection, liberty and freedom.

More over the human being in order to live happily, needs rights to smooth his/her life. This struggle paved the way to the concept of human rights. The most unique feature of human rights is that it is difficult to define but impossible to ignore. Human rights denote all those rights which are inherent in our nature and without which humans can’t live. Human rights are commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simple because she or he is a human being. These rights are indispensable for the human dignity which they can enjoy from birth to death. Scott Davidson rightly said that The concept of human rights is closely connected with the protection of individuals from the exercise of State, Government or authority in certain area of their lives, it is also directed towards creation of societal condition by the state in which individual are to develop their fullest potential.[3]

The concept of human rights is a dynamic concept, which one has to understand basing on its basic aim that is Man is born to be free and all that he must do is that be devoted to the wellbeing of human every kind of human being-of whatever race or religion, caste or creed or whatever sex and in all societies, developed and underdeveloped, traditional or modern. This truth this great objective, belongs equally to everyone. This also sums up the basic objective of human rights, which over the years has gained considerable importance in international thinking and has been the subject of much discussion and debate in recent times. These have been and still are, discussed in international platform such as United Nations, more over in respective national parliaments, in the media, and civil rights activities have been taking up the cause of emphasizing the importance and implementation of human rights for a civilized and healthy Society.

These necessary rights has been recognizing by world through several ways like adopting UDHR 1948 and relative international conventions and making separate legislations in respective countries and establishing human rights commissions, human rights courts and observing international human rights day etc. fortunately, India is also one of the country among these countries, which has been taking several steps for promotion and protection of human rights in India. Among these passing human rights Act, 1993 and more importantly it is very important to understand the expansion of human rights through the enhanced concept of Article 21 of the Indian constitution in recent times in India. Though there is a special legislation for the protection of human rights in India it is true that the human rights jurisprudence developed and has been developing by Indian Judiciary at its best and in great manner.

Origin of Human rights concept
Many philosophers say that the notion of Human Rights is a gift of contemporary human thought to culture and civilization, which one can witness in different generations. The struggle to promote, protect and preserve human rights changes and holds continuity in every generation in our society. But the concept and practice of human rights is the hallmark of any modern society. Since time immemorial, the story of human rights has been the story of human wrongs. It is perhaps to contain and curtail the wrongs by one human being or a group or a body of human beings against the other individual, or a group of beings against the other, that the institutions like family to society as a whole come into existence. The concept of human rights is a dynamic concept, which one has to understand basing on its basic aim that is “Man is born to be free and all that he must do is that be devoted to the wellbeing of human every kind of human being-of whatever race or religion, caste or creed or whatever sex and in all societies, developed and underdeveloped, traditional or modern”. This truth this great objective, belongs equally to everyone.

Thus one can say that Human rights are those rights which are essential for the survival of humans and their life, but no one knows exact origin of concept of Human rights. In history several events pawed the way for development of Human rights jurisprudence. In 539 BC, Cyrus the Great, after conquering the city of Babylon, did something totally unexpected—he freed all slaves to return home. Moreover, he declared people should choose their own religion. The Cyrus Cylinder, a clay tablet containing his statements, is the first human rights declaration in history.[4] Later the idea of human rights spread quickly to India, Greece and eventually Rome. Like above, though there were so many evidences about long history regarding human rights all they are in ambiguous form. So, many writers accepted that human rights concept can be best understood from the Magna Carta in England (1215).

Later, the American Declaration of Independence (1776), which proclaimed the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the French Declaration on the Rights of man (1789), which is a document of France, stating that all citizens are equal under the law, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia (1917), could be cited as important landmarks in the development of the concept of human rights and the U. N. Charter, 1945. Finally, the contemporary international statement of human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948 and provided first document listing the 30 rights to which everyone is entitled. Subsequently large number of international human right instruments and covenants came into existence such as International Covenants of 1966 and 1976 i.e. Civil and Political Rights and Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.[5] But this is not the end the human rights jurisprudence has been extending along with human development still do day.

DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS JURISPRUDENCE IN INDIA
The Indian constitution was drafted after the adoption of the universal Declaration Human Rights (1948) by United Nations, but it was adopted at a time when the deliberations for the Universal Deceleration were in air, so that the framers of the Indian Constitution were influenced by the concept of human rights,[6] and they already guaranteed most of the human rights which later on came to be embodied in the international covenant in 1966. In fact India was one of the original signatories to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and therefore the framers of Indian Constitution were influenced by the concept of human right and recognised as well as guaranteed most of the human rights which were subsequently embodied in the International Covenant 1966. It is evident from preamble itself. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution reflects the inspiring ideals with the specific mention of dignity of the individual.

More over even prior to the framing of the constitution for free India, Mahatma Gandhi had announced before the second round table conference[7] that his aim was to establish a political society in India in which there would be no distinction between high and low class people, that women should enjoy the same rights as men; and dignity and justice, social, economic and political, would be ensured to the teeming millions of India.[8] This was one of the objects, which inspired Pt. Jawaharlal Nehru in drafting the objectives resolution in the constituent assembly and which were adopted on January 22, 1947. And this ideal of the objectives resolution was reflected in the preamble of the constitution which was adopted in 26th November 1949 with the specific mention of dignity of the individual. It is thus evident that during the period between 1946 and 1949 India had formulated the concept of human rights and embodied in our constitution. Though the concept of human rights spread in whole constitution like a golden thread, they were mainly apparent in preamble, part III and part IV of the constitution. Later India took a lead in this behalf and enacted Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.[9] This Act besides other provisions provides for the creation of a National Human Right Commission.[10]

COMPARITIVE STUDY OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS UNDER INDIA CONSTITUTION and RIGHTS UNDER UDHR
In order to appreciate the concept of human rights under Indian Constitution, it is also pertinent to look to the aims and objects of the preamble, which are indeed the aims and objects of Indian Constitution. The preamble reflects the high purposes and noble objectives of the framers of the Constitution such as Justice to all in case of social, economic and political field; Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and opportunity, and to promote among them all; and Fraternity assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the Nation, which are so identical with aspirations of UDHR. In part III of the Indian constitution one can evident some of identical rights, which are provided by UDHR, they are :[11]

Like above there are so many human rights expressly incorporated under Indian Constitution by framers of the Indian constitution. But it would not be correct to contend that the above human rights are the only rights incorporated in Indian Constitution. Though, some human rights which do not find express mention in the Constitution do exist impliedly. Indian judiciary through judicial activism has been recognizing and interpreting constitutional provisions basing on human rights especially under Article 21 red with article 226 or 32 of the Indian constitution.

It is fact that now a day’s all over the world including in India, human rights violations are very common to see, to hear and therefore the awareness among individuals pertaining with their rights which are humanly recognized has emerged as a potential discourse as far as development among the citizens are concerned. And thus, it also on the other hand becomes very responsive role of Judiciary that it should come into the action and perform its supportive role for pronouncement up of the judgments regarding human rights into reality.

The strengthening of the judiciary is much required in context with human rights as it would be accustomed to be the part of the Constitutional remedy which would provide progressive efforts in the fields to evolve for the subject like human rights which is protected by the law of the land i.e. The Constitution of India. In regards to this in Section 30 of the Human Rights Protection Act 1993, which enumerates us about the establishments of the human rights courts but the offences arising out of the human rights violations have not been enumerates under the Act.

It has been deduced that the states where the human rights courts are established, made them functional. What is really happening is that issues which are getting occurred due to gross human rights violations are mostly getting punished under the criminal courts as considering the penal offence. Now the things which should be taken into the account is that the offences which are prescribed under the criminal law, must move towards the criminal courts and the offences not mentioned under the law of crimes should be given a place under the human rights courts as they too constitute the gross violations of the human rights arena.

Constitutional remedy to human rights courts establishment
It becomes very necessitate that the article 32(3) of the Constitution can be looked upon in regards with the enforcement of the human rights by the judiciary or the functioning of the human rights courts in India, as it imparts that the Parliament by law, can empower any other Courts except the Supreme Court, to exercise with the local limits of the jurisdiction or any other power which has been exercisable even by the Supreme Court, thus the section of Constitutional remedy under the constitution of the India for securing the rights, becomes very indispensable and which shall be known by each and every citizens of the India.

By this means, it would be possible to the other courts except the Supreme Court of India, for providing with the remedies which are themselves engrossed with the gross human rights violation have been taken place which will protect the sufferer from getting violated his fundamental right as well as the rights which has been inclusive of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, of which the India is signatory.

The several rights which are not been mentions specifically by the Constitution of the India but has been proliferated under the wide ambit of the Article 21 of the Constitution which enunciates us with many of the rights which includes as Right to health, Right to food, Right to shelter, Right to live in a healthy environment, Right to Livelihood, Right of Education, Right to privacy, Right against Solitary confinement, speedy trial, legal aid and many more can be classifies as those right which shall be enforced by the Human Rights Courts. So, now it is important to now some of the land mark judicial pronouncements regarding protection of human rights under fundamental rights perspective. From Maneka Gandhi case[13], a number of progressive propositions were made to make fundamental rights provided under Indian Constitution especially for Article 21 more meaningful by apex court and recognized so many human rights as fundamental right under Article 21. Some of them are as follows:

a) Right to go abroad;
In Satwant Singh v. Assistant Passport officer, New Delhi[14], in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India15 apex court held that right to travel abroad was part of a person’s liberty within the meaning of Art.21 and it should be curtailed only basing on just, reasonable and fair legal ground. Court also held that if there is a situation arose to curtail or limit it should be done only after providing reasonable opportunity to person simply PNJ has to be followed. Natural justice is a great humanizing principle intended to invest law with fairness and to secure justice.

b) Right to live with human dignity;
In Maneka Gandhi[15] case the court gave a new dimension to Art.21 and held that the tight to ‘live’ is not merely confined to physical existence but it includes within its ambit the right to live with human dignity. And then elaborating the same view the court in Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi[16], held that right to live is not restricted to mere animal existence. It means something more than just physical survival. The right to ‘live’ is not confined to the protection of any faculty or limb through which life is enjoyed or the soul communicates with the outside world but it also includes “the right to live with human dignity”, and all that goes along with it, namely, the bare necessities of life such as, adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and facilities for reading, writing and expressing ourselves in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing and comingling with fellow human being.

Similarly, in Consumer Education and Research Centre & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors[17], the Supreme Court was moved by human tragedy of modern industry; economic waste and health hazards on account of occupational accidents and diseases. The Supreme Court, while referring to a number of decisions, held that the right to life with human dignity encompasses within its fold some of the finer facets of human civilization which make life worth living. The right to health for a worker is an integral facet of meaningful right to life to have not only a meaningful existence, but also robust health and vigor, without which a worker would lead a miserable life.

c) Right to get minimum wage for work;
In Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India[18], court held that non-payment of minimum wages to the workers employed was a denial of their right to live with basic human dignity. Bhagawati, J speaking for the majority held that the rights and benefits conferred on the workmen under various labour laws are clearly intended to ensure basic human dignity to workmen and if the workmen are deprived of any of these rights or benefits that would clearly be a violation of basic human right and Art.21 also. For there In Deena v. Union of India[19], in this case court held that the prisoners are entitled to payment of reasonable wages for the work taken from them and the Court is under duty to enforce their claim.

Like above court held that having minimum wage, the health and strength of the worker is an integral facet of the right to life. Denial thereof deprives the workman of the finer facets of life, violating Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court emphasized that the right to human dignity, development and personality, social protection, and the right to rest and leisure are fundamental human rights to a workman. These are assured by the Charter of Human Rights, in the Preamble and Article 38 and 39 of the Constitution.

d) Right to Earn a Livelihood;
In Olga Tellis et. al. v. Bombay Municipal Corporation[20] apex court held that the question which we have to consider is whether the right to live includes the right to livelihood. We see only one answer to that question, namely, that it does. The sweep of the right of life conferred by Article 21 of the Constitution is wide and far reaching. It does not mean merely that life cannot be extinguished or taken away as, for example, by the imposition and execution of the death sentence, except according to procedure established by law. That is but one aspect of the right of life. An equally important facet of that right is the right to livelihood, because no person can live without the means of living – that is the means of livelihood. If the right to livelihood is not treated as a part of livelihood to the point of abrogation, such deprivation would not only denude the life of its effective content and meaningfulness, but it would make life impossible to live. And yet, such deprivation would not have to be in accordance with the procedure established by law, if the right to livelihood is not regarded as a part of the right to life. That, which alone makes it possible to live, leave aside what makes life livable, must be deemed to be an integral component of the right to life. Deprive a person of his right to livelihood and you shall have deprived him of his life.

e) Right to Health care or Doctor’s assistance[21];
In Parmanand Katara case court held that there can be no second opinion that preservation of human life is of paramount importance. In case of accidents injured should be given immediate medical aid to preserve life, and thereafter the procedural criminal law should be allowed to operate in order to avoid negligent deaths. That is so because once a life is lost, the status quo ante cannot be restored, as resurrection is beyond the capacity of man. A doctor at the Government hospital positioned to meet this State obligation is therefore duty bound to extend medical assistance for preserving life. Every doctor, whether at a government hospital or otherwise has the professional obligation to extend services with due expertise for protecting life. No law or State action can intervene to avoid/delay the discharge of the paramount obligation cast upon members of the medical profession. The obligation being total, absolute and paramount, laws of procedure, whether in statutes or otherwise which would interfere with the discharge of this obligation cannot be sustained and must, therefore, give away. The Supreme Court had directed that this decision be published in all journals and adequate publicity be given to it. Unfortunately, even as of this date, a substantial number of doctors, hospitals, police personnel and lay people are totally unaware of it.

f) Right against Handcuffing[22];
In Prem Shankar case Supreme Court held that “Handcuffing is prima facie inhuman and, therefore, unreasonable, is over harsh and at the first flush, arbitrary. Absent fair procedure and objective monitoring, to inflic ‘irons’ is to resort to zoological strategies repugnant to Art. 21……”

g) Right Again Solitary Confinement[23];
In Sunit Batra (No. 1) v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court held that even a prisoner has liberty to move, mix, mingle, talk, share company with co-prisoners it should not be curtailed without proper law. If in the name of solitary confinement there is total deprivation of friendship amongst co-prisoners coming and taking and being talked to, it would offend basic human right and violative of Art.21.

h) Non-citizens also entitled to right to life
In a landmark judgment in National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh[24], the highest court of India held that the State is bound to protect the life and liberty of every human being whether they are citizen or non-citizens.

i) Right to education
In Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka[25], their Lordships declared that unless there is right to education a person cannot enjoy the fundamental right to speech and expression in full so the education in India has never been a commodity for sale. Later in Unnikrishnan Case[26] court declared that the children of the age of 6 to 14 have right to education as fundamental right. After that by 86th Amendment Act, 2002 Art.21A was inserted to made education for all children of the age of 6 to 14 as free and compulsory.

The above list is simply illustrative and by no means exhaustive. There are so many other issues which are so connected with human rights recognized by Indian judiciary as fundamental rights.

They are as follows:
j) Right to Privacy[27];
k) Right Against Bar Fetters[28];
l) Right to free legal Aid in criminal trial[29];
m) Right to Speedy Trial[30];
n) Right Against delayed execution[31];
o) Right Against custodial violence[32];
p) Right Against Public Hanging[33];
q) Right to shelter[34];
r) Right to know;
s) Right to compensation;
t) Right to Release and Rehabilitation of Bonded Labour;
u) Right Against Cruel and Unusual Punishment;
v) Right to food and water;
w) Right to have clean, green and pollution free environment[35];
x) Right of Inmates of Protective Homes. And many more …………….

Besides, the declaration of above human rights within the expanding ambit of fundamental rights especially Article 21, Judiciary applied fundamental rights by taking in to consideration of human rights in various fields such as Drugs; Hazardous Chemicals; Insane Persons; Passports; Atomic Energy Radiation; Forests etc.

Like above Indian judiciary has been recognizing numerous human rights by enhancing the scope of fundamental rights to proved and promote justice to people. In fact the fundamental rights rights under Art.21 are greater than that of UDHR, Why because there is a doubt regarding binding nature of UDHR proclamation. Unlike the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution are not only binding, they are also enforceable through the Courts of law that to Art.21 cannot be suspended even during emergency.

More over human Rights in Indian Constitution can be found in the Preamble of the Constitution of India, Part III of the Constitution on Fundamental Rights and Part IV of the Constitution on Directive Principles, which together have been described as forming the core of the Constitution which together reflect the basic principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenants on Civil and Political Rights, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Part IVA of the Constitution on Fundamental Duties, Articles 300A,325 and 326 etc.

Human rights courts in India
Here it is worthwhile to deal about establishment of special human rights courts through the human rights Act 1993. Though this Act enacted with several objectives to achieve among all those one should specifically talk about as mentioned in the preamble is in regards with the establishment up of Human Rights Courts at the District Level, as from the base line as well as each and every court will be having its jurisdiction to work upon, thus providing with the great caliber for the protection up of the Human Rights.

The object so mentioned in the preamble of this act for the building up of the courts at the district level to ensue for the speedy function of the cases where the matter is being in relation of the suffering of human rights violations and gets its decision without being getting delayed in any form. As been prescribed under the Act of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (Chapter 6, Section 30) says that for the purpose of providing speedy trial to the cases involving Human Rights issues, the State Government may, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of India of the High Court, and specifying in each district a court of session or it can be said a Human Rights Court to try the cases pertaining to the field of only and only Human rights.

Special public prosecutor for the Human Rights courts
The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, section 31- emphasis upon for the appointment of the Special Prosecutor for the Human Rights Court to be appointed by the State Government, who would be acting as an advocate who have been in the practice for not less than 7 years.

Such Courts have been established in many states which are inclusive of Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Sikkim, Uttar Pradesh, Assam etc. And many other are getting into the process to be done in regards of the same.
Human Rights Court, when gets established will surely be having the status of a Court to adjudicate the justice for the Human Rights issues, and thus would be different body from the Human Rights Commission whether National or the State level, as the work which Court plays is differentiated from the Human Rights Commission.

From the above one can understand that in India, every Legal Right would be considered as Human Right, as meant for their own interests of protection and somewhere or the other for the promotion, but each and every right, which should be humanly recognized have not been still tagged with the assistance of Legal Right.

It is very well known by everyone that Law takes steady and gradual time period to evolve itself and coming up with its perfect version, as well as it should also be noted that Law follows a sequence or a consequence to be get evolved as well as for more of its proper interpretation it requires full proof measures as well as arguments put forth for its evolved form to get enforced.

Hence, it should be understood that because of the above mentioned principle, it may not always be possible to implement of codify all the requisite or the probable laws to get formulated or anticipated in the manner for the protection up of the Human Rights, and thus the role of our Indian Judiciary comes into the existence when it is enumerated about the principles of natural justice as due process of Law will govern and adjudicate for the protection and promotion of the rights of the people when they have suffered violations of the their rights and when to protect it no legislation has been framed, Thus Judiciary in this way don’t let anybody’s rights get infringed, rather protects them taking the issuance of the principles of natural justice.

Thus, it becomes a very implicit fact that rights which are humanely recognized makes up the base for any legislation to get framed in the country like India, as it becomes the duty of Judiciary or more specifically the Judges to understand the issues and provide for the enforcement of the rights for the well – being of the society.

Scope for extraordinary role by district judiciary
The District Judiciary provides for an effective role in adjudicating the Justice, as it would be a very big and huge responsibility for the Human Rights Courts for protecting up of the Rights which either by guaranteed by the Constitution of India or by any other specific statute incorporated by the India. Matters for the entertaining up of the application and its interpretation of the clauses like of Article 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India, in such cases would be looked up by the District Judicial Officer.

The point which is needed here to be understood that these Human Rights issues if got separated will be providing effectiveness in the working procedural functioning to the Courts as well as by adjudicating the cases of Human Rights provide for the great potential to solve as many as cases of the Human Rights in India.

Finally, it would not be wrong to say that the violation of human rights can be controlled only when there is a firm determination for the human dignity and values. It is equally important that the Indian society at large, including the political elite, both civil and police administration, the media, NGOs, civil society and intellectuals who yield influence in moulding the opinion in the society should have proper approach and attitude towards the protection of human rights. Each and every one in the society has the role to play an important role in securing human rights of the people.

There can be no peace without development, no development without peace, and no lasting peace or sustainable development without respect for human rights and the rule of law. – UN Deputy Secretary- General Jan Eliasson[36]

End-Notes
[1] Available at : http://www.wiseoldsayings.com/human-rights-quotes/
[2] “Human rights is a universal standard. It is a component of every religion and every civilization”- Shirini Ebadi. available at : https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/shirin_ebadi
Shirin Ebadi is an Iranian lawyer, a former judge and human rights activist and founder of Defenders of Human Rights Center in Iran. For more details see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirin_Ebadi
[3] Senapati Tushar Kanti, “Human Rights and Dalits in India: A Sociological Analysis”, Kalinga Institute of Social Sciences, KIIT University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, INDIA. Published in International Research Journal of Social Sciences Vol. 3(3), 36-40, March (2014). Available online at: www.isca.in, www.isca.me
[4] Available online at : http://www.youthforhumanrights.org/what-are-human-rights/background-of-human-rights.html
[5] For more detailed study about historical evolution of human rights. Available at : http://www.humanrights.com.
[6] K.P. Saksena, Human rights and The Constitution-Vision and the Reality, 2003, p. 29-30.
[7] D.D., Basu , Human Rights in Constitutional Law, 2008, p. 16
[8] Chapter 3- Directive Principles, 3.25.8. available online at: Ministry of Law and Justice website-lawmin.nic.in/ncrwc/finalreport/v1ch3.htm
[9] C.J. Nirmal, Human Rights in India-A historical, social and political perspectives, 2000, p. 289-291.
[10] C.J. Nirmal, Human Rights in India-A historical, social and political perspectives, 2000, p. 291-310.
[11] Abdulrahim P. Vijapur, The United Nations at fifty, Studies in Human Rights, 1996, p.197- 201.
[12] This fundamental right from Indian constitution was omitted by the constitution (44 Amendment) Act, 1978
[13] Maneka Gandhi v. UOI and others, AIR 1978 SC 597
[14] Satwant Singh v. Assistant Passport officer, New Delhi, AIR 1967 SC 1836.
[15] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
[16] Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746.
[17] Consumer Education and Research Centre & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors AIR 1995 SC 922
[18] Peoples Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473.
[19] Deena v. Union of India, AIR 1983 SC 1155.
[20] Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corportion (AIR 1986 SC 180)
[21] Parmanaand Katr v. Union of India SCC 1989 (4) p. 286
[22] Prem Shankar v Delhi Administration, AIR 1980 SC 1535.
[23] Sunil Batra v. Delhi Adm. (1 1978 SC. 1675), Sher Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1983 SC
[24] National Human Rights Commission v. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 1996 1 SCC 742.
[25] Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka,1992 (3) SCC 666
[26] Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P., 1993 (1) SCC 645.
[27] R. Rajagopa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1994 (6) SCC 632. And PUCL v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 568.
[28] Charles Shobraj v. Supp. Central Jail 1979.
[29] Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1978 SC 1548 . Hussain Arra v. Home secretary AIR 1979 SC 1369, Sukhdas v. arunachal Pradesh , AIR 1986 SC 991.
[30] State of H.P. v. Raja Mahindra Pal, AIR 1999 SC 1786.
[31] Jved Ahmed v. State of Maharashtra , AIR 1985 SC 231
[32] Sheela v. Union of India , AIR 1986 SC 1773
[33] AG of India v. Lachma Devi, AIR 1985 SC 467
[34] Chameli Singh v. State of UP, AIR 1996 SC 1051.
[35] Doon Valley Case (AIR 1985 SC 652), M. C. Mehta v. Union of India (AIR 1988 SC 1037), Oleum Gas Leak Case (AIR 1986 SC)
[36] Available online at : http://unfoundationblog.org/11-top-quotes-on-human-rights/

Written By Dr. Koneru Anuradha, Assistant Professor in Law, SVD Siddhartha Law College,
Kanuru, Vijayawada, Krishna DT, AP State, India. Pin code: 52007.
Email: [email protected]