Article 32 of Constitution of India
Article 32 of Constitution of India deals with Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this Part.
From the Constitution
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.
(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).
(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution.
Authorities amenable to Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court
- Government and the Parliament of India, Governments and Legislature of States and Local Governments
- Government Departmental undertakings
- Agencies incorporated by statute
- Agencies registered under statute such as the Companies Act, Societies Registration Act
- Private individuals and bodies
Agencies registered under statute are amenable only if the authorities are instrumentalities or agencies of the Government.
Court of Law are not mentioned but they do have a chance to pose a threat to fundamental rights. Supreme Court can interfere in such cases.
Private individuals and bodies are not amenable to this Article and hence are outside the Jurisdiction of Supreme Court in regard to this Article.
- The Supreme Court is made the protector and guarantor of the Fundamental Rights.
- It is not obligatory for the court to follow adversary system on cases related to this Article and 'appropriate proceedings' are sufficient.
- The remedy sought must be correlated to one of the fundamental rights sought to be enforced.
- Locus standi: Open for those whose fundamental rights are infringed. This was later relaxed to allow Public Interest Litigation cases thus allowing any 'public spirited citizen' to file the case.
Related Cases / Recent Cases / Case Laws
- Dr Ram Lakhan Singh v State Government of Uttar Pradesh through Chief Secretary Writ Petition (Civil) No 933 OF 2014, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition No 933 OF 2014, Supreme Court of India judgment dated November 17, 2015
- Dr Sandeep s o Sadashivrao Kansurkar and Others v Union of India and Others, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No 444 OF 2015, Supreme Court of India judgment dated October 27, 2015
- Shreya Singhal v Union of India, Criminal / Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No 167 OF 2012, Supreme Court of India judgement dated March 24, 2015 that struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000
- Kisan Shankar Kathore v Arun Dattatray Sawant and Others, Civil Appeal Jurisdiction, Civil Appeal No 4261 OF 2007, Supreme Court of India judgement dated May 9, 2014
- Union of India v V Sriharan @ Murugan and Others, Criminal Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Criminal) No 48 OF 2014, Supreme Court of India judgement dated April 25, 2014
- Samta Aandolan Samiti and Another v Union of India and Others, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No 677 OF 2013
- Rupa Ashok Hurra v Ashok Hurra, AIR 2002 SC 1771: In order to prevent gross miscarriage of justice, courts can allow curative petition by the victim of miscarriage of justice to seek a second review of the final order of the Court.
- Beenu Rawat and Others v Union of India and Others, Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Civil) No 446 OF 2013, Supreme Court of India judgement dated November 19, 2013
- Life Convict Bengal @ Khoka @ Prasanta Sen Vs B K Srivastava and Others, Criminal Appeal Jurisdiction, Criminal Appeal No. 1334 OF 2013, Supreme Court of India judgement dated February 13, 2013
- M Manohar Reddy and Another Vs Union of India and Others, Civil Appeal Jurisdiction, Civil Appeal No. 174 of 2013, Supreme Court of India judgement dated February 4, 2013
- Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) And Another petitioner(s) Vs Union of India & Another Respondent(s), Criminal / Civil Original Jurisdiction, Writ Petition (Criminal) NO.129 OF 2012, Supreme Court of India judgement dated January 4, 2013
- Gurpal Singh Vs High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 200 OF 2006, Supreme Court of India judgement dated November 27, 2012
- Kishore Samrite Vs State of UP and Others, Criminal Appeal No. 1406 of 2012, Supreme Court of India judgement dated October 18, 2012
- Sabeeha Faikage and Others Vs Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 505 of 2006, Supreme Court of India order dated October 18, 2012
- Baby Devassy Chully @ Bobby Vs Union of India and Others, Criminal Appeal No. 866 of 2008, Supreme Court of India judgement dated October 12, 2012
- Gulzar Ahmed Azmi and Another Vs Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (CRL.) No. 19 of 2012, Supreme Court of India judgement delivered on October 11, 2012
- Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. and Others Vs Securities and Exchange Board of India and anr., Supreme Court Judgement delivered on September 11, 2012
- Kochunni vs State of Madras, AIR 1959 SC 725: The right to move to Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental rights is itself a fundamental right
- K K Kochunni vs State of Madras: Article 32 itself being a fundamental right, the Court will give relief notwithstanding the existence of an alternative remedy.
- Darya vs State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1457: It is the duty of the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
- Gopal Das vs Union of India, AIR 1955 SC 1: An application under Article 32 cannot lie where no fundamental rights are infringed.
- Coffee Board vs CTO, AIR 1971 SC 870; Star Mills vs State of UP, AIR 1984 SC 373: No question other than relating to fundamental rights can be determined in a proceeding under Article 32.
- L Chandra Kumar vs Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 1125: In regard to tribunals, the Supreme Court of India held that the clause of Article 323A that excludes the jurisdiction of High Courts and Supreme Court under Articles 226 / 227 and 32 of the Constitution is unconstitutional.
- M C Mehta v Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1087
- The case widened the scope of public interest litigation to social interest litigation
- SC's power to grant remedial relief includes power to award compensation in appropriate cases
- Delhi Judicial Services Association v State of Gujarat: SC has sent five police officers including an IPS officer for criminal contempt of court when they arrested a Chief Judicial Magistrate, handcuffed him and tied him with a thick rope like an animal.
- Delhi Domestic Working Women's Forum v Union of India: SC has given guidelines for rehabilitation and compensation for women who are working women and assaulted by seven army personnel.
- Gaurav Jain v Union of India: Direction for protection of women from prostitution and rehabilitation of their children
- Common Cause v Union of India: Case on malpractices, malfunctioning and inadequacies of blood banks in the country.
Related Articles from the Constitution
- Article 226: Power of High Courts to issue certain writs
- Article 32A: [Repealed.]
- Article 33: Power of Parliament to modify the rights conferred by this Part in their application to Forces, etc.
- Article 34: Restriction on rights conferred by this Part while martial law is in force in any area
- Article 35: Legislation to give effect to the provisions of this Part