Due Process of Law
/djuː ˈprɒsɛs əv lɔː/
Constitutional Law Principle
Images
CC-licensed · free to useVideo
Definition
The requirement that the government must respect all legal rights owed to a person according to the law of the land. It has two dimensions: procedural due process (proper procedures must be followed before depriving someone of life, liberty, or property) and substantive due process (the law itself must be fair and reasonable, not arbitrary).
Examples
Case Study
India originally adopted 'procedure established by law' (not full due process) under Article 21, following the Japanese constitutional model rather than the American. In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court held that Article 21 merely required a procedure — any procedure, however harsh. But Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) overturned this, holding that the procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable — effectively importing substantive due process into Indian constitutional law.
Key Cases
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
1978AIR 1978 SC 597
Revolutionary judgment that transformed Article 21 from 'any procedure' to 'fair, just, reasonable procedure.' Effectively adopted American-style substantive due process into Indian constitutional law.
View on Indian Kanoon →A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras
1950AIR 1950 SC 27
The first major fundamental rights case after independence. Held that 'procedure established by law' under Article 21 means any procedure prescribed by law, however harsh — later overruled in spirit by Maneka Gandhi.
View on Indian Kanoon →Lochner v. New York
1905198 U.S. 45 (1905)
Controversial US case invalidating maximum hours legislation under substantive due process. Gave rise to the 'Lochner era' — a cautionary tale about judicial overreach through substantive due process.
View on Indian Kanoon →