Solved previous year question from the OPSC OAS/OCS 2022 Preliminary Examination (General Studies), with the official answer key and a detailed explanation.
Question
Which of the following statements are correct in respect of ‘Procedure established by Law’ and ‘Due process of Law’?
(I) Under the principle of ‘Procedure established by Law’, as long as the government follows the procedures it has established, its actions are considered valid, even if they may appear unfair, or unjust to individuals
(II) ‘Due Process of Law’ doctrine not only checks if there is a Law to deprive the life and personal liberty of a person but also sees if the Law made is fair, just and not arbitrary.
(III)‘Procedure established by Law’ is an American doctrine and ‘Due Process of Law’ is Indian constitutional doctrine.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Tap an option to check your answer.
Show answer & explanation
Answer & Explanation
Correct answer: (B) I and II are correct and III is not correct
Explaination
- The principle of "Procedure established by Law" means that a person can be deprived of life and personal liberty only according to the procedure prescribed by law. As long as the government follows the legally established procedure, its actions are valid — even if the law or procedure itself may appear unfair or unjust. This is embodied in Art. 21 of the Indian Constitution.
- The "Due Process of Law" doctrine goes beyond merely checking whether a procedure exists. It also examines whether the law itself is fair, just, reasonable, and not arbitrary. It gives courts the power to strike down laws that are unreasonable even if procedurally valid. This is a broader and more protective doctrine for individual liberty.
- "Procedure established by Law" is a doctrine borrowed from Japanese constitutional law and is the principle adopted in the Indian Constitution under Art. 21
- "Due Process of Law" is an American constitutional doctrine originating from the 5th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution
However it is worth noting that through the Maneka Gandhi case (1978), the Supreme Court of India substantially broadened Art. 21 to incorporate elements of due process, blurring the distinction between the two doctrines in Indian constitutional jurisprudence.
