Right to Constitutional Remedies

Right to Constitutional Remedies, enshrined in Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, is often referred to as the “heart and soul of the Constitution” (Dr. B.R. Ambedkar). This right empowers individuals to approach the judiciary directly to seek enforcement of Fundamental Rights when they are violated.

Meaning and Importance

Article 32 provides a mechanism to ensure that Fundamental Rights, guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, are not mere theoretical principles but practical entitlements. It allows citizens to seek judicial recourse against violations, thus acting as a cornerstone of India’s democratic framework.

The importance of this right lies in its enforceability:

  1. It safeguards Fundamental Rights, ensuring they remain sacrosanct.
  2. It empowers individuals against state or private actions that violate constitutional guarantees.
  3. It strengthens the rule of law and promotes constitutional governance.

Features of Article 32

  1. Right to Move the Supreme Court

    • Article 32 empowers individuals to approach the Supreme Court directly for enforcing Fundamental Rights.
    • The Supreme Court can issue appropriate directions, orders, or writs to restore rights.
  2. Writ Jurisdiction
    • The Court can issue five types of writs under Article 32 to address violations:
      • Habeas Corpus: Protects against unlawful detention.
      • Mandamus: Commands a public official to perform their duty.
      • Prohibition: Prevents inferior courts from exceeding their jurisdiction.
      • Certiorari: Transfers a case from a lower court or quashes its order.
      • Quo Warranto: Challenges the legality of a person holding a public office.
  3. Availability for Fundamental Rights

    • Article 32 can only be invoked to enforce Fundamental Rights. For other legal rights, remedies are sought under ordinary laws or Article 226 in High Courts.
  4. Supreme Court’s Role as a Guardian

    • Article 32 makes the Supreme Court the guarantor and protector of Fundamental Rights. It ensures the judiciary remains a robust pillar against misuse of power.
  5. Suspension During Emergencies

Article 32 can be suspended during a national emergency under Article 359, limiting its applicability during such periods.

Judicial Interpretation of Article 32

  • Broad Interpretation

In cases like Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984), the Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 32 by recognizing Public Interest Litigation (PIL). This allowed even non-affected parties to approach the court on behalf of marginalized groups.

  • No Limitations

In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review under Articles 32 and 226 forms part of the Constitution’s basic structure and cannot be curtailed by amendments.

  1. Effective Safeguards

The Court has consistently maintained that delays, procedural hurdles, or technicalities cannot obstruct access to justice under Article 32.

Article 32 vs. Article 226

While Article 32 grants individuals the right to approach the Supreme Court, Article 226 provides similar powers to High Courts. However:

  • Scope: Article 226 can address both Fundamental Rights and other legal rights.
  • Jurisdiction: High Courts have territorial jurisdiction, while the Supreme Court has nationwide jurisdiction.

Significance in Indian Democracy

  • Empowerment of Citizens

Article 32 empowers individuals to hold the state accountable, ensuring transparency and adherence to constitutional values.

  • Strengthening Judicial Review

By enabling judicial review, Article 32 protects against unconstitutional laws and actions.

  • Ensuring Equality and Justice

It ensures justice for all, regardless of socio-economic status, by providing a mechanism to address grievances directly.

  • Tool for Social Justice

The evolution of PIL under Article 32 has allowed the judiciary to address systemic injustices, making it a critical tool for societal reform.

Limitations of Article 32

  • Restricted to Fundamental Rights

It cannot be invoked for violations of ordinary legal rights.

  • Dependence on Judiciary

Access to justice under Article 32 requires judicial intervention, which can be resource-intensive and time-consuming.

  • Suspension During Emergency

The suspension of Article 32 during emergencies can lead to misuse of power by the state.

One thought on “Right to Constitutional Remedies

Leave a Reply

error: Content is protected !!