Question:

If by imposing solitary confinement there is total deprivation of comraderie (friendship) amongst co-prisoners coming and taking and being talked to, it would offend Ar.21 of the Constitution. The liberty to move, mix, mingle, talk, share company with co-prisoners if substantially curtailed would be violative of Art. 21 –This was held in the case of

Show Hint

Associate landmark cases with the specific right under Article 21 they established or expanded. \textit{Sunil Batra} is the key case for prisoners' rights and against solitary confinement, just as \textit{Maneka Gandhi} is for the right to travel and due process.
Updated On: Nov 1, 2025
  • Suni Batra Vs. Delhi Administration AIR 1978 SC 1675
  • Kishore Singh Vs State of Rajasthan AIR1981 SC 625
  • D.K. Basu Vs State of West Bengal AIR 1997 SC610
  • Parmanand Katara Vs Union of India - AIR 1989, SC 2039
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks to identify the landmark Supreme Court case that held that solitary confinement, which curtails a prisoner's right to interact with fellow prisoners, is a violation of the Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. This case is a cornerstone of prisoners' rights jurisprudence in India.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
In the case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court, through the powerful judgments of Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, held that prisoners are not stripped of their fundamental rights upon incarceration. The Court ruled that imposing solitary confinement is a severe punishment that can only be imposed by a court of law and not by prison authorities. It was held that subjecting a prisoner to solitary confinement without due judicial process is a gross violation of their fundamental right under Article 21, as it deprives them of human companionship and leads to mental and psychological degradation. The words in the question are a paraphrase of the reasoning given in this judgment.
- \textit{D.K. Basu} deals with the rights of an arrested person and procedures for arrest.
- \textit{Parmanand Katara} deals with the right to medical assistance for accident victims.
- \textit{Kishore Singh} also deals with prisoners' rights but \textit{Sunil Batra} is the specific and leading authority on solitary confinement.
Step 3: Final Answer:
This was held in the case of Suni Batra Vs. Delhi Administration.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0