In D. Bhuvan Mohan Patnaik and Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.

MANU/SC/0038/1974 : 1975CriLJ556 one of us, Chandrachud J., observed :-

Convicts are not, by mere reason of the conviction, denuded of all the fundamental rights
which they otherwise possess. A compulsion under the authority of law, following upon a
conviction, to live in a prison-house entails by its own force the deprivation of fundamental
freedoms like the right to move freely throughout the territory of India or the right to
"practice" a profession. A man of profession would thus stand stripped of his right to hold
consultations while serving out his sentence. But the Constitution guarantees other freedoms
like the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property for the exercise of which incarceration
can be no impediment. Likewise, even a convict is entitled to the precious right guaranteed
by Article 21 of the Constitution that he shall not be deprived of his life or personal liberty
except according to procedure established by law.

Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration and Ors. (30.08.1978 - SC) : MANU/SC/0184/1978

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India and Ors. MANU/SC/0051/1983 :

[1984]2SCR67 ,this Court held as under:

This right to live with human dignity enshrined in Article 21 derives its life breath from the
Directive Principles of State Policy and particularly Clauses (e) and (f) of Article 39 and
Articles 41 and 42 and at the least, therefore, it must include protection of the health and
strength of workers men and women, and of the tender age of children against abuse,
opportunities and facilities for children to develop in a healthy manner and in conditions of
freedom and dignity, educational facilities, just and humane conditions of work and maternity
relief. These are the minimum requirements which must exist in order to enable a person to
live with human dignity and no State - neither the Central Government nor any State
Government - has the right to take any action which will deprive a person of the enjoyment of
these basic essential.

Miss. Mohini Jain vs. State of Karnataka and Ors. (30.07.1992 - SC) : MANU/SC/0357/1992
That the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued notice to the Ministry of
Home Affairs, taking suo motu cognizance of media reports regarding the plans of the
government of India to deport about 40,000 illegal Rohingya immigrants from Myanmar,
who are residing invarious part of India. The NHRC press release dated 18th August, 2017,
states:

“The Commission has observed that refugees are no doubt foreign nationals but they are
human beings and before taking a big step the Government of India has to look into every
aspect of the situation, keeping the fact into focus that the members of the Rohingya
community have crossed into India borders are residing here for long, have a fear of
persecution once they are pushed back to their native country...The Commission has also
observed that the Supreme Court of India has consistently held that the Fundamental Right
enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution regarding Right to Life and Personal Liberty,
applies to all, irrespective of the fact whether they are citizens of India or not”. A copy of the
NHRC press release dated 18th August 2017 is annexed as Annexure P 4 (Page __________)