The Right to Life includes the right to the enjoyment of pollution-free water and air.
Explanation
Article 21 of the Constitution of India guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court has interpreted the "Right to Life" broadly to include the right to live with human dignity and the right to a healthy environment, moving beyond the concept of mere animal existence.
Analysis of the Judgment:
In the case of Subhash Kumar vs. State of Bihar (1991), the Supreme Court adjudicated on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) regarding the pollution of the Bokaro River by sludge discharge from washeries. The Court held that the Right to Life under Article 21 includes the right to the enjoyment of pollution-free water and air for the full enjoyment of life. It further established that if the quality of life is impaired by environmental pollution, citizens have the right to approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 for a remedy.
Analysis of Incorrect Options:
- The Right to Strike is a fundamental right.: The Supreme Court has clarified in judgments such as T.K. Rangarajan vs. Government of Tamil Nadu that the Right to Strike is not a fundamental right.
- Child labour in hazardous industries is unconstitutional.: The prohibition of child labour in hazardous industries is explicitly covered under Article 24 and interpreted in cases like M.C. Mehta vs. State of Tamil Nadu, but it was not the subject of the Subhash Kumar case.
- Foreign companies are liable for environmental damage in their home countries.: Liability for environmental damage by companies is generally associated with the principle of Absolute Liability established in M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case).
Key Takeaway:
The Subhash Kumar vs. State of Bihar (1991) judgment is the specific legal precedent that integrated the right to pollution-free water and air into the Fundamental Right to Life under Article 21.