Relevance: : GS Paper III – Science & Technology | Energy | Nuclear Technology | Infrastructure
For Prelims:
Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR), Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR), Criticality, Kalpakkam, BHAVINI, Three-Stage Nuclear Power Programme, Plutonium-239, Uranium-238, Thorium-232, MOX Fuel, Sodium Coolant, Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB)
For Mains:
energy security, indigenous technology, strategic autonomy, clean energy transition, nuclear self-reliance, thorium economy, base-load power, sustainable development, Viksit Bharat, low-carbon growth
Why in News?
The Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) at Kalpakkam in Tamil Nadu has achieved criticality, marking a major milestone in India’s nuclear energy journey.
- Prime Minister Narendra Modi described it as a historic achievement because the reactor has been built entirely using indigenous technology and represents India’s formal entry into the second stage of its Three-Stage Nuclear Power Programme.
- This development strengthens India’s long-term energy security strategy and supports the goal of reducing dependence on imported fossil fuels and uranium.
- The achievement is also important because India becomes one of the very few countries in the world to operate a commercial-scale Fast Breeder Reactor.
What Happened at Kalpakkam?
- The reactor at Kalpakkam is India’s Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR), located near the Madras Atomic Power Station in Tamil Nadu.
- It is a 500 MW sodium-cooled Fast Breeder Reactor developed by Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited (BHAVINI).
- The reactor has now attained criticality, which means it has successfully started a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction for the first time.
- This marks the transition from the construction phase to the operational phase and is one of the most important technical milestones before commercial power generation begins.
- The PFBR is expected to play a central role in India’s future nuclear expansion and thorium utilization strategy.
What is Criticality in a Nuclear Reactor?
Criticality refers to the state in which a nuclear reactor’s chain reaction becomes self-sustaining. It occurs when each fission of a nucleus (usually Uranium-235 or Plutonium-239) releases enough neutrons to cause, on average, exactly one more fission reaction. This maintains a steady and continuous release of energy without increasing or decreasing. Types of Criticality 1. Subcritical State (k < 1) 2. Critical State (k = 1) 3. Supercritical State (k > 1) Importance of Achieving Criticality When a reactor “attains criticality,” it means:
Thus, achieving criticality is considered a major milestone in a nuclear power project.
|
What is a Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR)?
- A Fast Breeder Reactor (FBR) is a type of nuclear reactor that produces more fissile fuel than it consumes.
- It uses fast neutrons (high-energy neutrons) to sustain the chain reaction and converts fertile material like Uranium-238 or Thorium-232 into fissile material such as Plutonium-239 or Uranium-233.
- This process is called breeding, hence the name “Breeder Reactor.”
How it Works?
- Fuel used: Usually Plutonium-239 + Uranium-238
- No moderator is used because fast neutrons are needed
- Coolant used: Commonly liquid sodium
- A surrounding blanket of fertile material absorbs neutrons and converts into new fuel
Example:
Uranium-238 → absorbs neutron → converts into → Plutonium-239
Thus, it generates energy and also creates new fuel.
Key Features
- Produces more fuel than it consumes
- Improves fuel efficiency
- Reduces dependence on natural uranium
- Supports long-term nuclear energy security
- Important for countries with limited uranium reserves
How an FBR Works?
- The core of the reactor uses Mixed Oxide Fuel (MOX), which is a combination of plutonium and uranium.
- Around the fuel core is a breeding blanket made of Uranium-238.
- When fast neutrons from the core strike Uranium-238, it gets converted into Plutonium-239, which is a fissile fuel. This process is called breeding.
- Liquid sodium is used as a coolant because it transfers heat efficiently and does not slow down neutrons, which is necessary for fast neutron reactions.
- This design allows the reactor to generate electricity while also producing more nuclear fuel for future use.
India’s Three-Stage Nuclear Power Programme
India’s nuclear programme was designed by Dr. Homi J. Bhabha to achieve long-term energy independence using India’s vast thorium reserves.
Stage I – Pressurized Heavy Water Reactors (PHWRs)
- These reactors use natural uranium as fuel and produce Plutonium-239 as a by-product.
- This plutonium becomes the fuel for the second stage.
Stage II – Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs)
- These reactors use plutonium-based MOX fuel and produce more plutonium while generating electricity.
- This is the stage India has now entered with the PFBR at Kalpakkam.
Stage III – Thorium-Based Reactors
- These reactors will use Thorium-232 to produce Uranium-233, leading to long-term sustainable nuclear power generation.
- Since India has one of the world’s largest thorium reserves, this stage is crucial for energy security.
Role of PFBR in India’s Nuclear Strategy
- The PFBR is the bridge between India’s uranium-based first stage and thorium-based third stage.
- Without successful Fast Breeder Reactors, India cannot effectively transition to thorium-based nuclear energy.
- The PFBR helps India multiply its fissile material resources and reduces long-term dependence on imported uranium.
- It also supports India’s clean energy goals by providing reliable base-load power without carbon emissions associated with fossil fuels.
- This makes PFBR not just a reactor, but the foundation of India’s long-term nuclear sovereignty.
BHAVINI and Indigenous Development
- The PFBR has been designed and developed by Bharatiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam Limited (BHAVINI), a public sector enterprise under the Department of Atomic Energy.
- It represents one of India’s most advanced indigenous technology achievements in the strategic energy sector.
- More than 200 Indian industries contributed to the manufacturing of reactor components, reflecting strong domestic industrial capability.
- This supports the goals of Aatmanirbhar Bharat and Viksit Bharat by reducing dependence on foreign nuclear technology and creating high-end scientific capacity within India.
Significance of the Achievement
- The PFBR strengthens India’s energy security by enabling efficient use of limited uranium resources.
- It supports climate goals by expanding low-carbon electricity generation and reducing fossil fuel dependence.
- It marks India’s entry into a highly advanced group of nations with commercial Fast Breeder Reactor capability, with only Russia having similar large-scale operational success.
- The achievement also promotes scientific innovation, advanced metallurgy, reactor engineering, and strategic industrial development.
- In the long term, it improves India’s preparedness for a thorium-driven energy future.
Challenges Associated with Fast Breeder Reactors
- Fast Breeder Reactors are technologically complex and expensive to build and operate.
- Liquid sodium coolant, though efficient, is highly reactive with air and water, creating safety challenges.
- Construction delays and cost overruns have historically affected breeder reactor projects globally.
- Many countries such as the United States, France, and Japan reduced or closed breeder reactor programmes because of safety and economic concerns.
- Public concerns regarding nuclear safety and radioactive waste management also remain major policy challenges.
- Therefore, strong regulation and long-term technical planning are essential.
Way Forward
- India must ensure the safe commissioning and stable operation of the PFBR before expanding breeder reactor capacity further.
- Investment in Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) and advanced nuclear technologies should continue alongside breeder reactor development.
- The Atomic Energy Regulatory Board must maintain strong safety oversight and public trust through transparent regulation.
- Research on thorium fuel cycles must be accelerated so that the transition to Stage III becomes practically achievable.
- Private sector participation in manufacturing and nuclear supply chains should be expanded carefully while retaining strategic control.
- A strong domestic ecosystem of nuclear science, engineering, and skilled manpower is essential for sustained growth.
Conclusion
The criticality of the Kalpakkam Fast Breeder Reactor is not merely a scientific milestone—it is a strategic turning point in India’s energy future.It confirms India’s progress toward self-reliant nuclear technology and brings the country closer to realizing its long-term thorium-based energy vision.
As India moves toward cleaner growth and greater strategic autonomy, the success of the PFBR will remain one of the defining pillars of its civil nuclear programme.This achievement represents both technological confidence and national energy security.
CARE MCQ
Q. Consider the following statements about Critical Mass in the context of nuclear physics:
- Critical mass is the minimum amount of fissile material required to sustain a nuclear chain reaction.
- Critical mass is independent of the shape, size, and density of the fissile material.
- The concept of critical mass applies only to nuclear weapons and not to nuclear reactors.
- Uranium-235 and Plutonium-239 are examples of materials capable of achieving critical mass.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 4 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1, 2 and 4 only
(d) All of the above
Ans: (a)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: Critical mass refers to the minimum quantity of a fissile material needed to maintain a self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction. If the amount of fissile material is below this level, too many neutrons escape and the chain reaction stops. Once critical mass is reached, enough neutrons remain available to continue fission reactions continuously.
Statement 2 is incorrect: Critical mass is not fixed only by quantity; it also depends on the shape, size, density, purity, and presence of neutron reflectors around the material. For example, a spherical shape requires less critical mass because it minimizes neutron leakage compared to irregular shapes. Therefore, this statement is incorrect.
Statement 3 is incorrect: The concept of critical mass applies to both nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors. In nuclear weapons, an uncontrolled chain reaction is produced rapidly after achieving supercritical mass. In nuclear reactors, the system is carefully maintained at criticality so that energy is released in a controlled manner for electricity generation. Hence, this statement is incorrect.
Statement 4 is correct: Uranium-235 (U-235) and Plutonium-239 (Pu-239) are important fissile isotopes capable of achieving critical mass. They are widely used in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons because they can sustain chain reactions through neutron-induced fission. Therefore, this statement is correct.
Q. Which of the following statements accurately describes the corrosion resistance of liquid sodium when used as a coolant in Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs)?
(a) Liquid sodium, due to its inherent inertness, does not react with reactor materials irrespective of its purity.
(b) The excellent corrosion resistance of liquid sodium towards stainless steel is maintained by ensuring extremely low levels of dissolved oxygen.
(c) Liquid sodium forms a stable, self-healing oxide layer on reactor components which protects them from further corrosion at high temperatures.
(d) High operating temperatures in FBRs significantly reduce the corrosive nature of liquid sodium, making it compatible with most metals.
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
Option (b) is correct:
In Fast Breeder Reactors (FBRs), liquid sodium is widely used as a coolant because of its excellent heat transfer properties, high boiling point, and ability to operate at low pressure. Although sodium is highly reactive with air and water, it shows good compatibility with structural materials such as stainless steel when its purity is carefully maintained.
The key factor for corrosion resistance is keeping the level of dissolved oxygen extremely low. If oxygen is present in higher amounts, sodium reacts with metals and forms sodium-metal oxides, which increase corrosion and damage reactor components. Therefore, strict control of oxygen impurities is essential for maintaining the integrity and long life of the reactor system
Q. Consider the following statements about a nuclear chain reaction:
- A nuclear chain reaction occurs when one nuclear reaction causes one or more subsequent nuclear reactions.
- A chain reaction becomes self-sustaining only when the average number of neutrons causing further fission is less than one.
- Nuclear chain reactions are the fundamental principle behind the working of nuclear reactors.
- The concept of a nuclear chain reaction was first theorized by Hungarian physicist Leo Szilard in 1933.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 3 only
(b) 2 and 4 only
(c) 1, 3 and 4 only
(d) All of the above
Ans: (c)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: A nuclear chain reaction happens when neutrons released from one fission event trigger additional fission events in nearby fissile atoms. This creates a sequence where one reaction leads to one or more further reactions, making the process continuous. This is the basic principle behind nuclear energy production.
Statement 2 is incorrect: For a chain reaction to be self-sustaining, the multiplication factor (k) must be equal to or greater than 1. This means that on average, at least one neutron from each fission must cause another fission. If the number is less than one, the reaction becomes subcritical and gradually stops. Therefore, the statement is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct: Nuclear reactors operate on the principle of a controlled nuclear chain reaction. The heat released during continuous fission is used to produce steam, which drives turbines and generates electricity. Without chain reactions, nuclear power generation would not be possible. Hence, this statement is correct.
Statement 4 is correct: The idea of a nuclear chain reaction was first proposed by Leo Szilard, a Hungarian physicist, in 1933. He realized that if neutrons released from one reaction could trigger further reactions, enormous energy could be produced. This idea later became the foundation for both nuclear reactors and atomic bombs. Therefore, this statement is correct.
FAQs
Q1. What is PFBR?
Ans: PFBR stands for Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor, India’s first commercial-scale Fast Breeder Reactor located at Kalpakkam.
Q2. Why is PFBR important for India?
Ans: It enables India to enter Stage II of its Three-Stage Nuclear Programme and supports future thorium-based nuclear power generation.
Q3. What does criticality mean?
Ans: It means the reactor has achieved a self-sustaining controlled nuclear chain reaction for the first time.
Q4. Why is sodium used as coolant?
Ans: Because sodium transfers heat efficiently and does not slow down neutrons, which is necessary for fast neutron reactions.
Q5. Who designed India’s Three-Stage Nuclear Programme?
Ans: It was designed by Dr. Homi J. Bhabha.
Relevance: GS Paper II – Polity | Fundamental Rights | Judiciary | Governance
For Prelims:
Article 21, Right to Life, Right to Safe Travel, National Highways, Right of Way (ROW), Suo Motu Case, Highway Blackspots, Supreme Court Directions, National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), Road Safety
For Mains:
constitutional morality, positive obligations of State, road safety governance, infrastructure accountability, judicial activism, public safety, human dignity, transport justice, welfare state, administrative responsibility
Why in News?
- The Supreme Court of India has declared that the right to safe travel on highways is a part of the fundamental Right to Life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- The judgment came during a suo motu proceeding initiated after major road accidents in Rajasthan and Telangana in November 2025 caused the death of 34 people.
- The Court observed that roads, especially National Highways and expressways, cannot be allowed to become death traps due to illegal constructions, poor parking management, and administrative negligence.
- It emphasized that the State has a constitutional duty not only to avoid unlawful deprivation of life but also to actively create conditions for safe living, including secure public roads.
Supreme Court Judgment
- The Supreme Court held that safe movement on highways is not merely an administrative matter but a fundamental constitutional guarantee linked to the Right to Life.
- The Court stated that citizens using public roads must not be exposed to avoidable risks caused by poor planning, illegal encroachments, dangerous parking practices, and failure to remove accident-prone blackspots.
- It prohibited the establishment of new dhabas, eateries, fuel points, and commercial structures within the right-of-way of National Highways.Heavy vehicles were directed to park only in designated parking bays and authorized wayside amenities.
- The Court stressed that failure to ensure road safety amounts to failure of governance and violation of constitutional responsibility.
What is the Right to Safe Travel?
- The Right to Safe Travel means that every citizen has the right to use roads and highways without facing unreasonable danger arising from State neglect or infrastructural deficiencies.
- It includes safe road design, proper signage, controlled access, removal of illegal encroachments, scientific traffic management, and prompt correction of accident-prone zones.
- It also includes protection from hazards such as unauthorized roadside structures, illegal parking of heavy vehicles, poor lighting, damaged roads, and lack of emergency response systems
- This concept transforms road safety from a policy issue into a rights-based constitutional obligation.
Article 21 and Expansion of Right to Life
- Article 21 states:
“No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” - Originally, Article 21 was interpreted narrowly in the A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras case, where the Supreme Court held that as long as there was a law and the procedure prescribed by that law was followed, deprivation of life or liberty was valid.
- However, in the landmark Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India case, the Court gave Article 21 a broad and dynamic interpretation. It held that the procedure must be just, fair, and reasonable, and not arbitrary, oppressive, or fanciful.
- After this judgment, the meaning of “life” under Article 21 expanded far beyond mere physical survival. The Court held that life means living with human dignity and includes all those aspects that make life meaningful, complete, and worth living.
Why Highway Safety Became a Constitutional Issue
- National Highways constitute only around 2% of India’s total road network but account for nearly 30% of all road fatalities.
- This disproportionate number shows that highways are among the most dangerous spaces for road users despite being the most important transport corridors.
- High-speed traffic combined with poor infrastructure management, roadside encroachments, and absence of scientific parking arrangements increases fatal accident risks.
- Illegal dhabas and roadside commercial establishments often create sudden vehicle stoppages and dangerous turning points.
- Blackspots—locations with repeated accidents—continue to exist because of poor administrative follow-up.
National Highways and Road Safety Crisis
- India records one of the highest numbers of road accident deaths in the world.
- National Highways and expressways, despite better engineering standards, often become sites of high-impact fatal crashes because of speed and unsafe roadside conditions.
- Common causes include over-speeding, fatigue, drunken driving, poor lane discipline, unauthorized access points, roadside settlements, and unregulated parking.
- The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and State transport departments often face criticism for weak enforcement and delayed correction of known hazards.
- The Court’s intervention reflects the urgency of shifting from reactive accident response to preventive road governance.
Constitutional Basis of State Responsibility
- Article 21 imposes a positive obligation on the State to protect life.
- This means the State must not only avoid arbitrary action but must also actively ensure conditions necessary for safe existence.
- Road safety falls within this obligation because unsafe highways directly threaten life and dignity.
- Directive Principles such as Article 38 and Article 39 also support this approach by requiring the State to promote welfare and protect human well-being.
- The welfare state model demands that infrastructure be designed for public safety rather than only economic efficiency.
- Therefore, highway safety becomes part of constitutional governance rather than mere transport administration
Important Judgments Related to Article 21
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) The Court gave a narrow interpretation and held that if procedure prescribed by law is followed, deprivation of liberty is valid. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) The Court held that procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable and connected Articles 14, 19, and 21 as the “Golden Triangle.” Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979) Recognized the Right to Speedy Trial under Article 21. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) Recognized the Right to Livelihood as part of Right to Life. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) Recognized the Right to Privacy as a Fundamental Right under Article 21. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) Recognized the Right to Die with Dignity and passive euthanasia. The present highway safety ruling adds the Right to Safe Travel to this expanding constitutional framework. |
Challenges in Implementation
- Removal of illegal roadside structures often faces political and local resistance.
- Coordination between NHAI, State Governments, police departments, and local bodies remains weak.
- Enforcement against heavy vehicle parking violations is inconsistent across states.
- Many highways still lack proper emergency trauma response systems and scientific blackspot correction.
- Data collection on accident causes is often poor, limiting effective policy intervention.
- Without institutional accountability, judicial directions may remain weak at the ground level.
Way Forward
- India must adopt a rights-based approach to road safety rather than treating it only as a transport issue. NHAI and State authorities should conduct mandatory safety audits of all major highways and expressways.
- Accident blackspots must be corrected within fixed timelines with public accountability mechanisms.
- Integrated parking infrastructure and regulated wayside amenities should replace informal roadside stoppages.
- Technology such as AI surveillance, speed cameras, GIS-based blackspot mapping, and emergency response networks should be expanded.
- Road safety education and strict enforcement must complement infrastructure reforms.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s declaration that safe highway travel is part of Article 21 marks a major evolution in Indian constitutional law.
It recognizes that the right to life includes not only survival but safe and dignified movement in public spaces.
By linking road safety with fundamental rights, the Court has placed direct constitutional responsibility on the State to prevent avoidable deaths.
This judgment transforms highways from mere transport corridors into spaces where the Constitution itself must protect life.
CARE MCQ
Q. With reference to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
- It is available only to citizens of India.
- The Supreme Court has interpreted it to include the Right to Privacy and Right to Safe Travel.
- Article 21 can be suspended during a National Emergency.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
A. 2 only
B. 1 and 2 only
C. 2 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (a)
Explanation
Statement 1 is incorrect : Article 21 is available to both citizens and non-citizens.
Statement 2 is correct : the Supreme Court has recognized both the Right to Privacy and the Right to Safe Travel under Article 21.
Statement 3 is incorrect : After the 44th Constitutional Amendment, Articles 20 and 21 cannot be suspended even during a National Emergency.
Q.Consider the following statements with reference to the Maneka Gandhi case (1978):
Statement-I: The Passport Act, 1967 could be subjected to judicial review on the ground that it affected fundamental rights.
Statement-II: The Supreme Court held that the expression “procedure established by law” under Article 21 must be just, fair, and reasonable, and not arbitrary, fanciful, or oppressive.
Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?
(a) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II is the correct explanation for Statement-I
(b) Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct but Statement-II is not the correct explanation for Statement-I
(c) Statement-I is correct but Statement-II is incorrect
(d) Statement-I is incorrect but Statement-II is correct
Ans: (a)
Explanation:
Statement-I is correct:
In the Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) case, the petitioner challenged the impounding of her passport under the Passport Act, 1967 without being given proper reasons or an opportunity to be heard. The Supreme Court examined whether such a law and executive action could violate fundamental rights, especially under Articles 14, 19, and 21.
The Court held that even a law passed by Parliament could be subjected to judicial review if it violated fundamental rights. Thus, the Passport Act was open to constitutional scrutiny. Therefore, Statement-I is correct.
Statement-II is correct:
Before this judgment, Article 21 was interpreted narrowly after the A.K. Gopalan case, where “procedure established by law” meant any procedure enacted by law, regardless of fairness.
In the Maneka Gandhi case, the Supreme Court expanded this interpretation and held that such procedure must be just, fair, and reasonable, and should not be arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable. This introduced the concept of substantive due process into Indian constitutional law and linked Article 21 with Articles 14 and 19. Hence, Statement-II is correct.
Why Statement-II explains Statement-I:
Because the Court interpreted Article 21 to require fairness and reasonableness, any law affecting personal liberty—including the Passport Act—could be tested on these grounds. This is exactly why the Passport Act became subject to judicial review. Therefore, Statement-II directly explains Statement-I.
Q.With reference to landmark Supreme Court judgments, consider the following statements:
- In the Maneka Gandhi case, the Court expanded the scope of Article 21 by ruling that the “procedure established by law” must be fair, just, and reasonable.
- In the Indra Sawhney case, the Court upheld 27% reservation for OBCs and stated that the total reservation should generally not exceed 50%.
- In the S.R. Bommai case, the Court made the imposition of President’s Rule under Article 356 subject to judicial review and laid down safeguards against its misuse.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (d)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is correct: The Maneka Gandhi judgment (1978) transformed the interpretation of Article 21 by declaring that any law affecting life and personal liberty must follow a procedure that is fair, just, and reasonable. It rejected the narrow interpretation of Article 21 and established a broader protection of civil liberties.
Statement 2 is correct: In Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), also known as the Mandal case, the Supreme Court upheld the 27% reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in central services. It also laid down the important principle that total reservations should generally not exceed 50%, except in extraordinary circumstances, and introduced the concept of the creamy layer.
Statement 3 is correct: In S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994), the Supreme Court held that the use of Article 356 (President’s Rule) is subject to judicial review. It ruled that the majority of a government should be tested on the floor of the House and not decided arbitrarily by the Governor or the Centre. This judgment became a major safeguard for Indian federalism.
Q. Consider the following pairs of Supreme Court cases and their primary subject matter:
- Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan — Legal recognition of the third gender
- K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India — Declaration of Right to Privacy as a fundamental right
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India — Decriminalization of consensual homosexual acts
Which of the pairs given above is/are correctly matched?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (b)
Explanation:
Pair 1 is incorrectly matched: The Vishaka case (1997) dealt with sexual harassment of women at the workplace and led to the famous Vishaka Guidelines, which served as the basis for later workplace harassment laws. It was not related to third gender recognition.
The legal recognition of the third gender was given in NALSA v. Union of India (2014). Therefore, Pair 1 is incorrect.
Pair 2 is correctly matched: In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court unanimously declared that the Right to Privacy is a fundamental right protected under Article 21 and linked with dignity, liberty, and personal autonomy. Therefore, Pair 2 is correct.
Pair 3 is correctly matched: In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court struck down the part of Section 377 of the IPC that criminalized consensual homosexual relations between adults. This was a major judgment for LGBTQ+ rights in India. Therefore, Pair 3 is correct.
FAQs
Q1. Which Article protects the Right to Safe Travel?
The Supreme Court has held that safe travel on highways is protected under Article 21 as part of the Right to Life.
Q2. Why did the Supreme Court intervene?
It acted after fatal highway accidents in Rajasthan and Telangana exposed serious road safety failures.
Q3. What is the right-of-way (ROW) on highways?
It is the legally designated land area reserved for the highway and its safe functioning, where unsafe constructions are restricted.
Q4. Can new dhabas be built near National Highways?
The Court has prohibited new dhabas and commercial establishments within the right-of-way of National Highways.
Q5. Which case expanded Article 21 the most?
The most important case is Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), which made Article 21 broad, dynamic, and rights-oriented.
