Yes, the Supreme Court of India has referred to international law in various judgments, especially in cases involving human rights, environmental protection, and extradition. While India follows a dualist approach to international law (where international treaties or conventions do not automatically form part of Indian domestic law unless enacted by Parliament), the Supreme Court often uses international law to interpret fundamental rights or fill gaps in Indian law. Here are some landmark judgments where the Supreme Court referred to international law: 1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) - Issue: Sexual harassment at the workplace. - International Law Reference: The Court referred to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), a UN treaty, to create guidelines for the prevention of sexual harassment at the workplace. The Court held that since India is a signatory to the CEDAW, its provisions should be followed until Parliament enacts suitable laws. 2. National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India (2014) - Issue: Rights of transgender people. - International Law Reference: The Supreme Court referred to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) while recognizing the fundamental rights of transgender individuals in India. 3. Common Cause v. Union of India (2018) - Issue: Euthanasia and right to die with dignity. - International Law Reference: The Court referred to international human rights law, especially the principles of autonomy and dignity, as guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to establish guidelines for passive euthanasia in India. 4. Rathinam v. Union of India (1994) - Issue: Right to life and right to die. - International Law Reference: The Court referred to international conventions and recognized that the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution includes the right to live with dignity, which extends to the right to choose death in certain cases. 5. Shah Faesal v. Union of India (2019) - Issue: Right to life and liberty in Kashmir post-abrogation of Article 370. - International Law Reference: The Court cited international human rights law relating to freedom of movement and due process of law, especially in relation to Jammu and Kashmir’s special status and the protection of rights under international treaties. 6. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India (2000) - Issue: Environmental protection and displacement due to the Narmada Dam project. - International Law Reference: The Court referred to the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which emphasizes sustainable development and the protection of human rights concerning environmental impacts. Key Points: - Influence of International Law: While the Supreme Court is not bound by international treaties unless incorporated into domestic law, it has used international law as an interpretative tool for expanding fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. - Article 51(c) of the Constitution: The Court often refers to this provision, which encourages India to promote international peace and security and respect for international law. Conclusion: Yes, the Supreme Court has repeatedly referred to international law, particularly in areas like human rights, environmental protection, and constitutional interpretation. International treaties may not have direct force unless enacted into law, but they significantly influence the Court's judgments on matters of constitutional law and human rights.

Dear client, Yes, the Supreme Court of India has consistently referred to International Law in its judgments, particularly in the areas of human rights, constitutional interpretation, and environmental protection. International Law is not applied directly in India, but it is consistently used as an authority when it is not contradicting domestic law and: India is a signatory to the concerned international treaty or convention. Major Cases Where the Supreme Court Quoted International Law: 1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) Issue: Sexual harassment at workplace International Law Quoted: CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women) Relevance: The Court employed international norms to frame rules on sexual harassment as there was no legislation at the national level. 2. People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (1996) Issue: Wiretapping and right to privacy International Law Referenced: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Significance: Contributed to the interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty). 3. Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1999) Issue: Mother's guardianship rights International Law Relying Upon: CEDAW Significance: Used international obligations to interpret guardianship rights under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act. 4. NALSA v. Union of India (2014) Issue: Transgender people's rights International Law Referenced: Yogyakarta Principles on sexual orientation and gender identity Significance: Enshrined the right of gender identity as a fundamental right of the Constitution. 5. Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja (2014) Topic: Jallikattu and animal cruelty International Law Cited: UN Convention on Animal Welfare (soft law) Significance: Utilized international norms to enhance animal rights under Article 21. "International law and treaties to which India is a signatory, although not judicially enforceable except by way of legislation, can otherwise find entry in the interpretation of the Constitution if not repugnant to laws in force." — (Vishaka Case) I hope this answer helps. In case of future queries, please feel free to contact us. Thank you.