WRITS OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Indian Constitution is majestic in the fact that it grants its inhabitants a number of rights. Fundamental rights are one among the most important rights for the intellectual and moral growth of Indian citizens.These rights, together with the rights to equality, freedom, protection against exploitation, and freedom of religion, as well as the right to constitutional remedies, are outlined in Part III of the Indian Constitution. It is insufficient to merely state these constitutional rights and grant them to Indian citizens. And hence there is a binding duty upon the legislative and judiciary to safeguard the fundamental rights of citizens. 

The Indian Constitution’s Articles 32 and 226 offer remedies and the ability to enforce the rights listed in Part III in order to defend these fundamental rights. The right to file an appropriate motion with the Supreme Court or the High Court is provided by Articles 32 and 226 respectively. Anyone whose fundamental rights have been violated is eligible to exercise this privilege.

WRITS. 

‘Writs’ refers to an order that has been written down for the court’s use. An individual or element is directed by an authority document issued by the court to carry out a certain demonstration or to cease carrying out a specific activity or conduct. Writs include orders, warrants, bearings, summonses, and other documents. A writ appeal is a request made in writing and submitted to the competent Court for the issuance of a specific writ.

There are five different types of writs: certiorari, quo warranto, habeas corpus, prohibition and mandamus.

Fundamental rights are of remarkable importance in our Constitution because they protect citizens’ fundamental civil liberties. However, keep in mind that these rights would lose all of their significance if the victim of an injustice lacks the means to petition the court for the violation of his fundamental rights. The founding architects of our Constitution therefore gave us the “right to constitutional remedy” under Articles 32 and 226 in order to address this requirement. We can go to court to request the issuance of a specific writ in order to protect our rights. We shall look into the significance of Articles 32 and 226 in this essay. We shall also delve deeply into the import and types of writs that can be issued by our illustrious courts.

 

• HABEAS CORPUS 

‘You may receive the body of’ is the meaning of the legal term habeas corpus. When someone is being held against their will, they may use this writ. The court directs the individual in custody to be brought before the court to have the legality of his detention reviewed through the use of this writ.

It is possible to file a writ of habeas corpus in the following 3 situations:

1. When a person is arrested and held without appearing before a magistrate within 24 hours, not including travel time.
2. When a person is detained despite the fact that they have not broken any laws.
3. When someone is detained with bad intentions. 

One latest and popular Habeas Corpus Petition was that of Arnab Goswami, editor-in-chief of Republic TV. He has contested his detention in the case of aiding suicide before the Bombay High Court using the writ of habeas corpus.

In the following cases, a writ of habeas corpus cannot be filed:

1. When the subject of the petition of habeas corpus is an entity that is outside the court’s territorial jurisdiction.
2. Where a person is being detained in compliance with the law.

The Supreme Court extended the reach of habeas corpus to protect inmates against brutal treatment by the jail staff in the case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, 1980. In this instance, it was decided that the court had the authority and duty to safeguard the inmates from this disrespectful attitude and could utilize the habeas corpus writ to compel prison humanism.  

Bhim Singh, a State of J and K MLA, was wrongfully apprehended, imprisoned in the police headquarters, and prevented from attending the State Legislative Assembly in the case of Bhim Singh v. State of J and K. The applicant was awarded Rs. 50,000 by the court as compensation for the violation of his constitutional right to individual freedom under Art. 21.

2. MANDAMUS 

“We command’ is the meaning of the Latin phrase mandamus. A public servant is typically given a command by the court to carry out his duties after he has neglected to do so. For the same reason—namely, that they neglected to carry out their official responsibilities—the writ of mandamus may also be issued against a business, a lower court, or an agency of the government.

The following situations exclude the filing of a writ of mandamus:

The Indian President and the Governor of State are not subject to the writ of mandamus. The President and the Governor of State are exempt from appearing before a court for the discharge of their official duties under Article 361 of the Indian Constitution. The President and the Governor of State are exempt from legal accountability under the Indian Constitution for the discharge of their official responsibilities. The High Court and Supreme Court justices cannot be subject to a writ of mandamus for failing to carry out their judicial responsibilities. A private person or a private organization cannot be the target of a writ of mandamus.

Mandamus is a directive issued by the Supreme Court or the High Courts to any open power to carry out or refrain from carrying out a commitment to the public. It is given to individuals or professionals who fail to fulfill their legal commitments. The official must have a public duty and must neglect to fulfill it in order for the writ of mandamus to be justified. Additionally, the candidate for this writ should be given the choice to limit any obligations imposed on the power.

The State of West Bengal v. Barada Kanta Adhikary, and it was decided that the writ of mandamus that private individuals or private organizations are not subject to the writ of mandamus since they are not subject to a public responsibility.

 

• CERTIORARI 

‘Certified’ or ‘to be informed’ is what the word certiorari means. It is typically given by a higher court to a subordinate court in order to either rescind the decision made or transfer the ongoing matter to a higher authority. The Supreme Court decided in 1991 that administrative agencies may also be subject to writs of certiorari if their decisions violate a person’s rights.

In the 1995 case of Hari Vishnu v. Ahmed Ishaque, the court decided that a manifest error that is obvious on the face of the proceedings may also be subject to a writ of “certiorari” if it affects the conclusion or determination itself.

The following circumstances allow for the issuance of the writ of certiorari:

1. A court that is qualified to exercise its judicial powers must exist.
2. If a lower court’s decision violates any of the Constitution’s enumerated laws.
3. If there is a mistake in the decision made by a lower court.

Simply put, the word “prohibit” implies “to forbid.” Only judicial and quasi-judicial agencies are eligible for the writ of prohibition. In general, governmental authorities and private individuals are not subject to this writ. 

At any point in the course of its proceedings, a superior court or against a lower court may issue an order prohibiting an act that is carried out unlawfully.

 

• QUO WARRANTO 

Quo warranto is Latin for “by what power or by what warrant.” It is typically issued by a court to inquire about the legitimacy or authority of his office. It prohibits anyone from holding a public office without their will.

There can be no issuance of a quo warranto against:

1. A minister cannot be fired from his job due to a complaint being filed against him.
2. It cannot be used to reprimand a state’s chief minister for failing to carry out his constitutional obligations.
3. In the case of a ministerial office or a private office, this writ cannot be issued.  

Any person whose fundamental rights, as listed in Part III of the Indian Constitution, are violated may file a writ petition. It serves as a deterrent to the violation of fundamental rights.

5. PROHIBITION 

It means “to prevent.” Each Court is expected to act within the bounds of its authority. A writ of preclusion is issued to prevent a poor Court or Tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction, which isn’t legally vested, acting without a ward, or acting in violation of common equity principles. The writ of prohibition may be issued both against the courts and professionals working in legal or quasi-legal capacities.

A prohibition maybe allowed in the following circumstances : 

1. When a lower court or quasi-judicial body oversteps its authority. when an inferior court exercises authority that is not lawful.  
2. When the rule of natural justice is violated by a lower court or quasi-judicial authority ‘s decision appears to be in error

WHO CAN FILE A WRIT PETITION? 

Any person whose Fundamental Rights have been violated by the State may file a writ request. Any open, active person may file a writ request under a Public Interest Litigation if their concern for the general welfare of society justifies it, regardless of whether their own Fundamental Right has been infringed.

CONCLUSION 

The High Courts or the Supreme Court may receive the writ petition for the alleged violation of basic rights. A person may file a writ petition with the Supreme Court under Article 32 alleging that their fundamental rights have been violated. When one of one’s fundamental rights is violated, a person may move to the High Courts to submit a writ petition in accordance with Article 226. It should be mentioned that in order for a writ petition to be effective, the authority it is lodged against must be located on Indian soil. A person may file a lawsuit in either of the courts when his fundamental rights are violated. The most important point to be noted is that, The Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution and hence it is not required that the writ petition has to be filed at the High Court first. Citizens may move the Supreme Court directly when there is a violation of their fundamental rights.

ARTICLE BY PRIME LEGAL.