https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169247 Personal liberty under Article 21 was treated as wide enough to include freedom of locomotion and travel abroad, and any restriction on that right had to be backed by procedure established by law. The absence of enacted statutory authority for curtailing foreign travel was treated as decisive, so executive interference without law was impermissible. Refusal to issue or withdrawal of passport facilities on unguided executive discretion was also held arbitrary and discriminatory, because action affecting a person prejudicially must rest on legal authority and comply with equality guarantees under Article 14. The impugned withdrawal of passport facilities was set aside and restoration directed. en-us Mon, 10 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2015 14:31:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169247 Personal liberty under Article 21 was treated as wide enough to include freedom of locomotion and travel abroad, and any restriction on that right had to be backed by procedure established by law. The absence of enacted statutory authority for curtailing foreign travel was treated as decisive, so executive interference without law was impermissible. Refusal to issue or withdrawal of passport facilities on unguided executive discretion was also held arbitrary and discriminatory, because action affecting a person prejudicially must rest on legal authority and comply with equality guarantees under Article 14. The impugned withdrawal of passport facilities was set aside and restoration directed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 10 Apr 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169247