Which of the following statements are correct in respect of ‘Procedure established by Law’ and ‘Due process of Law’? (I) Under the principle of ‘Procedure established by Law’, as long as the government follows the procedures it has established, it’s actions are considered valid, even if they may appear unfair, or unjust to individuals (II) ‘Due Process of Law’ doctrine not only checks if there is a Law to deprive the life and personal liberty of a person but also sees if the Law is fair, just and not arbitrary. (III) ‘Procedure established by Law’ is an American doctrine and ‘Due Process of Law’ is Indian constitutional doctrine.

- Statement I is correct. The principle of 'Procedure established by Law', as traditionally interpreted in India (prior to the expansion of Article 21's scope), meant that a person could be deprived of life or personal liberty if there was a law providing for such deprivation and the procedure laid down by that law was strictly followed, regardless of whether the procedure itself was fair or just. - Statement II is correct. The 'Due Process of Law' doctrine, which is prominent in the US Constitution and has been read into Article 21 by the Indian Supreme Court (especially post-Maneka Gandhi case), goes beyond checking for the existence of a law and compliance with its procedure. It also examines whether the law itself is fair, just, and reasonable, and not arbitrary. - Statement III is incorrect. 'Procedure established by Law' is the concept explicitly mentioned in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution (originally influenced by the Japanese Constitution), and its interpretation evolved over time. 'Due Process of Law' is the doctrine originated and followed in the United States, which was subsequently adopted and applied by the Indian Supreme Court to expand the scope of Article 21.