Right to Constitutional Remedies — [Part-III: Article 32 & Part-VI: Article 226]

Dr. B. R. Ambedkar called Article 32 the “heart and soul of the Constitution.”
It makes Fundamental Rights enforceable, transforming them from moral ideals into legal guarantees.
It gives citizens the right to directly approach the Supreme Court for the protection of Fundamental Rights.

“Where there is a right, there must be a remedy.” — Legal maxim: Ubi jus ibi remedium
Therefore as per this maxim Article 226 and 32 (Writs) acts as a shiled for all rights confered by the Constitution on the people of India.

2. Text and Scope of Article 32 #

Article 32(1): The right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights is itself a Fundamental Right.
Article 32(2): The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs for enforcement of rights conferred by Part III.
Article 32(3): Parliament may empower other courts to exercise similar powers.
Article 32(4): This right shall not be suspended except as provided by the Constitution (e.g., during Emergency under Article 359).

Thus, Article 32 is both a right and a remedy — it guarantees enforcement of rights.

3. Nature and Significance #

4. Writ Jurisdiction — Meaning and Nature #

Meaning #

“Writ” means a formal written order issued by a superior court commanding an act or forbidding one.
It is the principal constitutional remedy for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Writ-Issuing Authorities #

• Supreme Court: Under Article 32 (nationwide jurisdiction).

• High Courts: Under Article 226 (broader, including other legal rights).

5. Different Kinds of Writs under Article 32 #

Illustrative FIRAC Example — Habeas Corpus #

Case: ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976 AIR SC 1207)

Facts: During Emergency (1975–77), detenus challenged their preventive detention.
Issue: Whether Article 21 and 32 remedies survive during suspension of Fundamental Rights.
Rule: Article 359 permitted suspension.
Application: Majority held no habeas corpus during Emergency; minority (Justice Khanna) dissented.
Conclusion: Later overruled by Maneka Gandhi (1978) and Puttaswamy (2017) — right to life cannot be suspended.

6. Article 226 — Power of High Courts #

Text #

High Courts can issue writs:

“for enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.”

Nature #

• Wider than Article 32 — includes enforcement of Fundamental as well as other legal rights.

• Discretionary, not a Fundamental Right.

• High Courts may decline relief if an alternative remedy exists.

7. Comparison: Article 32 vs Article 226 #

📘 Case: L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997 3 SCC 261) —
Held that judicial review under Articles 32 & 226 is part of the Basic Structure; no tribunal can exclude it.

8. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) #

8.1. Origin #

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) was started in India by the judiciary through a proactive approach to social justice, with Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer being instrumental in its development in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The concept was inspired by judicial activism in the United States and was adapted in India to address social and economic issues. A key figure was lawyer Kapila Hingorani, who is known as the “Mother of PIL” for her work on the first recognized PIL case, Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar.

8.2. Meaning #

PIL is a judicial innovation allowing any public-spirited person to approach the Court for enforcement of rights of the poor, marginalized, or voiceless.
Developed through liberal interpretation of Article 32 and 226.

8.3. Objectives #

• Access to justice for disadvantaged groups.

• Protection of collective and diffuse rights.

• Promotion of good governance and accountability.

8.4. Judicial Evolution #

8.5. Judicial Controls over PIL #

• PIL cannot be used for private disputes or publicity.

• Courts may dismiss frivolous or motivated petitions.
  📘 Case: State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal (2010 3 SCC 402) — laid down guidelines to prevent misuse.

9. Significance of Article 32 and Judicial Remedies #

10. Key Takeaways #

1. Article 32 → Fundamental Right to Constitutional Remedy.

2. Writs → Mechanisms to enforce Fundamental Rights.

3. Article 226 → Wider jurisdiction for High Courts, covering legal rights.

4. PIL → Judicial innovation ensuring access to justice for the voiceless.

5. Judicial Review under Articles 32 & 226 → Basic Structure of the Constitution.

“The right to move the Supreme Court under Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right — it is the cornerstone of democratic justice.”
— Justice P. N. Bhagwati, S. P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)