The Maneka Gandhi case (1978) significantly broadened the interpretation of Article 21. The Supreme Court held that the 'procedure established by law' must be "just, fair, and reasonable" and not arbitrary. This essentially injected the concept of 'procedural due process' into Article 21. When a procedure established by law deprives a person of life or personal liberty, the state must show that the procedure is just, fair, and reasonable. The burden is on the state to justify the procedure, not on the petitioner to prove its arbitrariness.