Article 32 of The Indian Constitution: The right to approach the Supreme Court and seek remedies for the enforcement of basic rights is guaranteed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. This clause is important as well as essential because it gives individuals a way to file complaints when their fundamental rights are violated. One of the most important provisions of the Constitution for sustaining the rule of law is Article 32.
The Objective of Article 32 of the Indian Constitution
The objective of Article 32 is to offer citizens whose basic rights have been violated a quick and effective remedy. To uphold basic rights, the Supreme Court has the authority to grant writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari.
Features of Article 32
- Fundamental Right: Article 32 is regarded as a fundamental right in and of itself. It gives people the ability to petition the Supreme Court directly to have their basic rights upheld.
- Broadly Applicable: Article 32 is applicable to all Indian citizens, regardless of their gender, caste, religion, or other demographic characteristics. It guarantees that everyone has equal access to justice.
- Remedial Writs: Article 32 gives the Supreme Court the authority to issue a number of writs, including certiorari, quo warranto, prohibition, habeas corpus, and mandamus. These writs are powerful weapons for safeguarding basic rights and redressing judicial or administrative mistakes.
- Supreme Court jurisdiction: According to Article 32, the Supreme Court has the power to hear petitions challenging both government actions and private parties that are infringing basic rights.
- Although Article 32 is a basic right, it may be suspended during an emergency that is proclaimed in accordance with Article 352 of the Constitution. The enforcement of the basic rights protected by Articles 20 and 21 cannot be suspended, nonetheless.
- Judicial Review: Article 32 strengthens the idea of judicial review by giving the Supreme Court the authority to assess whether legislation, executive orders, or policies that could impinge on basic rights are constitutional.
- Self-Executing Provision: Because Article 32 is self-executing, anyone can go straight to the Supreme Court to have their fundamental rights upheld without the aid of any legislation.
- The Supreme Court may also employ this clause to secure the execution of directive principles of state policy when they are infringed, even though Article 32 primarily concentrates on the enforcement of basic rights.
- The Supreme Court has a constitutional obligation to uphold and defend basic rights, as stated in Article 32. It guarantees that the court upholds the Constitution and defends the rights of the people.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Article 32 has had a significant role in encouraging PIL, which enables people or organizations to submit petitions on behalf of the general public or socially disadvantaged groups in order to safeguard their rights.
Writs Under Article 32
Under Article 32, the Supreme Court has the authority to issue writs, although it is not required to do so in every case. The Court takes into account the type of right violated, the severity of the breach, and if alternate legal remedies are available while determining whether to grant a writ.
The Court also takes into account whether there are any more legal options. The Court could be less likely to grant a writ if there are other accessible remedies.
Types of writs that can be issued under Article 32:
- Habeas corpus: This writ is used to bring a person who is being held illegally before a court.
- Mandamus: This writ is used to order a public authority to perform a legal duty.
- Prohibition: This writ is intended to prohibit a subordinate court or tribunal from exceeding its authority.
- Quo warranto: This writ is used to question a person’s or body’s legal authority to hold public office.
- Certiorari: This writ is used to overturn an order or decision made by a lower court or tribunal.
Circumstances under which the Supreme Court can dismiss a writ petition under Article 32
- The petition is vexatious or frivolous. This means that the petition has no validity and was filed just to harass the respondent.
- The petition has not been filed in the proper forum. This indicates that the petition is being heard by the Supreme Court, despite the fact that it should have been heard by a lower court.
- The petition is time-barred. This signifies that the petition was filed after the deadline for doing so had passed.
- The petition does not present a major legal or factual issue. This signifies that the petition raises no significant legal or factual problems.
- Another forum may be able to resolve the petition more effectively. This indicates that the petition should be heard in another setting, such as a lower court.
Achievements of Article 32
- Landmark Decisions: The delivery of landmark decisions that have reinforced the protection of fundamental rights has been made possible in part by Article 32. For instance, the Supreme Court established the notion of basic structure in the case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, protecting the fundamental tenants of the Constitution.
- Access to Justice: By giving everyone direct access to the Supreme Court, Article 32 has made sure that everyone has access to the legal system. It has enabled people, particularly members of poor and marginalized groups, to seek legal redress when their basic rights are violated.
- Judicial Activism: In India, Article 32 has encouraged judicial activism. By interpreting and intervening under Article 32, the Supreme Court has actively contributed to defending and advancing basic rights, creating significant precedents for cases to come.
- Protection from Arbitrary Actions: Article 32 serves as a defense against the government’s and private entities’ arbitrary actions. By discouraging abuses of basic rights and guaranteeing responsibility, it acts as a deterrent.
Drawbacks of Article 32
- Backlog of Cases: The Indian judiciary’s growing case backlog is one of Article 32’s major problems. The growing backlog of cases has slowed down the administration of justice and complicated the prompt settlement of issues pertaining to the upholding of basic rights.
- Legal Fees and Affordability: For those with low financial means, the expense of bringing a case with the Supreme Court, as well as the cost of legal counsel, might be a disincentive. This might make it more difficult for those who are economically disadvantaged to obtain justice equally.
- Judiciary overworked: The Supreme Court is under extreme pressure under Article 32 as a result of the overwhelming volume of lawsuits for the enforcement of basic rights. The court’s ability to administer justice may be hampered by the volume of cases.
- Subjectivity in Interpretation: Article 32’s description of fundamental rights is susceptible to interpretation. Judges’ varied points of view might result in a variety of interpretations, which affects the consistency and uniformity of judgments pertaining to the enforcement of basic rights.
Conclusion
The Indian Constitution’s Article 32 serves as a strong cornerstone in defending and upholding basic rights. It gives people the ability to appeal directly to the Supreme Court, assuring access to justice and safeguarding the values of fairness, equality, and the rule of law. Even while it has made tremendous progress in defending individuals’ rights, fixing its flaws and enacting the required changes would strengthen this crucial clause and make the legal system more effective and accessible.
FAQs on Article 32 of the Indian Constitution
Q. Can emergencies justify a suspension of Article 32?
Ans: The ability to petition the Supreme Court under Article 32 may be restricted during an emergency. Nevertheless, the suspension does not apply to the application of Articles 20 and 21.
Q. Can private people or companies be subjected to Article 32?
Ans: Yes, if private people or organizations violate a person’s basic rights, Article 32 may be used against them. It guarantees that citizens can file complaints against both public and commercial enterprises.
Q. What distinguishes Article 32 from Article 226?
Ans: While Article 32 gives the right to petition the Supreme Court to have one’s basic rights enforced, Article 226 gives the same right to petition High Courts. While Article 226 only applies within the particular High Court’s jurisdiction, Article 32 covers the entire nation.
Q. Can a person immediately petition the Supreme Court without using all other available options?
Ans: Citizens are permitted to approach the Supreme Court immediately under Article 32 without first using any other remedies accessible to them under regular law. However, this clause does not prevent anyone from turning to lesser courts or authorities before the Supreme Court in order to obtain a remedy.
Q. What role does Article 32 play in upholding basic rights?
Ans: The core of the Indian Constitution, Article 32, functions as a basic right in and of itself. It provides a strong mechanism for individuals to seek justice and the defense of their rights by ensuring the enforcement of basic rights and acting as a check on any infringement of these rights.