Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Part III of the Indian Constitution, encompassing Articles 12 to 35, guarantees Fundamental Rights to all citizens. These rights are not absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions. However, the Constitution provides robust legal remedies to enforce these rights, ensuring their effective realization. These remedies are enshrined in Article 32 (for the Supreme Court) and Article 226 (for the High Courts), forming the cornerstone of judicial review and safeguarding individual liberties against state action. The power to issue writs is central to these remedies, allowing courts to intervene and correct injustices.
Writs under Article 32 and 226
The Supreme Court and High Courts possess the power to issue writs to enforce Fundamental Rights. While the powers are similar, Article 32 is a fundamental right itself, making it broader in scope than Article 226, which is a constitutional power.
1. Habeas Corpus (Article 32 & 226)
Latin for “to have the body,” this writ is issued to secure the release of a person who is detained unlawfully. It challenges the legality of detention. Example: If a person is arrested without following due procedure, a writ of Habeas Corpus can be filed to challenge the detention.
2. Mandamus (Article 32 & 226)
Meaning “we command,” this writ directs a public official or government body to perform a public duty that they are legally obligated to perform. Example: If a municipal corporation fails to provide basic amenities like water supply, a writ of Mandamus can compel them to fulfill their duty.
3. Prohibition (Article 32 & 226)
This writ is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting in violation of natural justice. Example: If a tribunal starts hearing a case that falls outside its defined jurisdiction, a writ of Prohibition can be issued to stop the proceedings.
4. Certiorari (Article 32 & 226)
Latin for “to be certified,” this writ is issued to quash the order of a lower court or tribunal if it has committed an error of law or acted without jurisdiction. It’s a corrective measure. Example: If a lower court passes an order based on an unconstitutional law, a writ of Certiorari can be used to nullify that order.
5. Quo Warranto (Article 32 & 226)
Meaning “by what authority,” this writ challenges the legality of a person’s claim to a public office. It ensures that only legally qualified individuals hold public positions. Example: If a person occupies a public office without fulfilling the necessary qualifications, a writ of Quo Warranto can be issued to remove them.
Limitations of Writs
- Locus Standi: Only a person whose fundamental right is violated can approach the court.
- Exhaustion of Remedies: Generally, alternative remedies must be exhausted before approaching the High Court or Supreme Court.
- Sovereign Functions: Courts are hesitant to issue writs concerning policy decisions involving sovereign functions of the state.
Evolution and Landmark Cases
The scope of these writs has been expanded through judicial interpretation. The Maneka Gandhi case (1978) broadened the interpretation of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) and consequently, the application of these remedies. The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) established the basic structure doctrine, further strengthening judicial review and the importance of these remedies.
| Writ | Purpose | Issued Against |
|---|---|---|
| Habeas Corpus | Unlawful detention | State/Private Individuals |
| Mandamus | Non-performance of public duty | Public Officials/Government Bodies |
| Prohibition | Excess of jurisdiction | Lower Courts/Tribunals |
| Certiorari | Error of law/jurisdiction | Lower Courts/Tribunals |
| Quo Warranto | Illegality of office claim | Public Office Holders |
Conclusion
The legal remedies provided under Articles 32 and 226 are vital for protecting Fundamental Rights and upholding the rule of law in India. These writs empower citizens to challenge unlawful actions of the state and ensure accountability. While subject to certain limitations, these remedies remain a cornerstone of India’s constitutional framework, safeguarding individual liberties and promoting a just and equitable society. Continuous judicial interpretation and evolving societal needs will continue to shape the application and effectiveness of these fundamental rights safeguards.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.