A Comparative Study of Rights of Detainee: India and the USA
Keywords:
Preventive, USA, Articles 19 and 21, Constitution of India, 1950, portrayedAbstract
The concept of preventive detention was introduced into India during the colonial rule. It was used to
prevent the spread of nationalist ideas which started budding in the nineteenth century but all the time
it was portrayed as a law that was implemented for the well-being and protection of the country. The
basic idea behind preventive detention is to stop the occurrence of any untoward incident that would
hamper the safety and security of the country in any manner. Post-independence many laws were implemented in India furthering preventive detention. In the Constitution of India, 1950, under Article 22(3) the laws on preventive detention are validated. Preventive detention hits at the core of human rights and the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19 and 21. This paper attempts to
understand the concept of preventive detention concerning fundamental rights and to analyze potential violations of detainees' fundamental rights. It compares the laws addressing preventive detention in the USA, provides a brief analysis of its origins, and examines the current effects of these laws in both the USA and another country.
References
Constitution of India, Article 22 (5).
Ibid, Article 22.
The National Security Act, 1980, Section 3(1).
Supra 2, Article 22 (4) (a).
Supra 2, Article 22 (5).
Kitai-Sangero R. The Limits of Preventive Detention. McGeorge Law Rev. 2008;40(4):903-34. Available from: https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/mlr/vol40/iss4/3.
Reddy BV. A critical analysis on preventive detention in India. Supremo Amicus. 2020;19:155-68.
Supra 3n.
Supra 2n.
Supra 2, Article 22 (4).
Supra 2, Article 22 (7) (a).
Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.
The Andhra Pradesh Rights in Land and Pattadar Pass Books Act, 1971 (Act No. 26 Of 1971).
A.K. Roy v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 710.
Supra 14n.
Boharea N. The Constitution of India in 1950 and 2022: A critical analysis. Jus Corpus Law J. 2023;3(2):810–7.
Supra 13n.
The Defence of India Act, 1962. Chapter I.
Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 434.
Ajaib Singh v. Gurubachan Singh, AIR 1965 SC 1619.
Singhal, N. Preventive Detention Laws in India. J. Indian L. & Soc'y. 2021; 12:51-58.
Supra 2n.
Supra 2n.
The Internal Security Act. 1950. Sections 103-111 (U.S.A.).
The Constitution of U.S.A. 1787; Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2.
United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 (1987).
Supra 7n.
Jain M. Judicial creativity and preventive detention in India: an aspect of Indian Constitutional and Administrative Law. J. Malaysian Comp. L. 2018; 2(2): 261-309.
Bhim Sen v. State of Punjab, AIR 1951 SC 481.
Kishori Mohan v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1972 SC 1749.
Sadanandan v. State of Kerala, AIR 1966 SC 1925.
Anil Dey v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1974 SC 832.
Shibban Lal Saxena v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 179.
Madhab Ray v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1975 SC 255.
Jayanarayan Sukul v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1970 SC 675.
Deb Sadan Roy v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1972 SC 1924
Venkatesvaraloo v. Superintendent, Central Jail, AIR 1953 SC 49.
Jagadish Prasad v. State of Bihar, AIR 1974 SC 911, 914.
Babu Lal Das v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1975 SC 606.
Supra 29n.
Supra 2n.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 16 December 1966. Article 9(4). General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI). [online] Available from: https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/ international-covenant-civil-and-political-righ.
