JudiciaryImportant2025-01-15

SC Declares Sanitation in Courts a Fundamental Right

In News

What Happened

On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of India in 'Rajeeb Kalita v. Union of India' delivered a landmark judgment declaring that access to clean and accessible public toilets in courts is a fundamental right under Article 21. The Bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, directed all States and Union Territories to provide separate toilet facilities for men, women, persons with disabilities (PwD), and transgender individuals. They also ordered the formation of dedicated committees in High Courts to oversee the funding, construction, and maintenance of these facilities.

Why It Matters

This ruling is vital for India as it reinforces the principle that sanitation is an inseparable part of the right to live with human dignity and ensures equal access to justice. By legally acknowledging the specific needs of marginalized groups, it ensures that a lack of basic physiological amenities does not act as a barrier for litigants, lawyers, or judges participating in the judicial system.

Background

History & Context

The judgment stemmed from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed under Article 32 by advocate Rajeeb Kalita, who highlighted the severe lack of hygienic toilets across Indian courts and tribunals. Previous assessments, including a November 2023 Supreme Court report titled 'State of the Judiciary', had already pointed out the absence of gender-inclusive washrooms and the need to protect the privacy of the third gender. The Court noted with deep concern that even judges and advocates, particularly in rural district courts, frequently lack access to basic washroom facilities, which tarnishes the reputation of the judicial system.

What Changed

▶
BEFORE: Toilet facilities in many courts were non-existent, unhygienic, or lacked inclusive infrastructure for vulnerable groups. NOW: States and UTs are legally mandated to construct and maintain hygienic, separate toilets for men, women, transgender persons, and PwD, complete with basic amenities like running water, locks, and ramps.
▶
BEFORE: There was no formal, localized oversight mechanism to ensure the continuous upkeep and funding of court sanitation. NOW: Each High Court must form a dedicated committee comprising senior judges and government officials to survey infrastructure, recommend improvements, and oversee fund allocation.
▶
BEFORE: The lack of sanitation in courts was largely viewed as an administrative or infrastructural inconvenience. NOW: It is officially recognized as a violation of the fundamental right to life and dignity under Article 21, reinforcing the State's directive duty to improve public health under Article 47.

Prelims Angle

NCERT Connection

This judgment is a direct application of the concepts taught in Class 11 Political Science (Indian Constitution at Work), Chapter 2: 'Rights in the Indian Constitution'. It demonstrates the expansive interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) by the judiciary, illustrating how fundamental rights continuously evolve to include dignified living conditions like sanitation, health, and inclusive access to public spaces.

Practice Questions

Q1

Correct Statement(s)

With reference to the Supreme Court's 2025 judgment on sanitation in court premises (Rajeeb Kalita v. Union of India), which of the following statements is/are correct? 1. The Court declared access to clean toilets in courts as a fundamental right under Article 21. 2. The judgment mandated separate facilities exclusively for men and women, intentionally leaving out provisions for transgender individuals to be decided by individual states.

Up next