Article 32: The Guardian of Fundamental Rights and the Path to Justice
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution stands as a formidable bulwark, providing every citizen with a direct avenue to justice through the revered halls of the Supreme Court. Beyond being a constitutional provision, Article 32 acts as a dynamic force, empowering individuals to safeguard and assert their fundamental rights. As we approach this legal gateway, it’s crucial to grasp the historical context, landmark cases, and the contemporary relevance of Article 32 in shaping the justice landscape in India.
Role of Supreme Court in Protecting Rights:
Article 32 grants citizens the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights, often regarded as the “heart and soul” of the Constitution. It ensures access to justice and protects citizens against encroachments on their basic rights.
Article 32 significance:
Article 32 not only empowers individuals but also acts as a check on the legislative and executive branches. It plays a pivotal role in upholding the rule of law, ensuring that fundamental rights are not merely theoretical but enforceable in practice. Article 32 significance lies in upholding the rule of law.
Landmark Cases:
-
Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973):
A cornerstone in understanding the limitations on the amending power of the Parliament, emphasizing that while the Parliament can amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its basic structure.
-
Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978):
This case expanded the scope of personal liberty under Article 21, emphasizing that the procedure established by law must be fair and reasonable.
Recent Developments:
- Right to Privacy (Puttaswamy Judgment, 2017): The Supreme Court declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21, reinforcing the individual’s autonomy and personal space.
- Sabarimala Temple Entry Case (2018): The Court addressed the right to equality and freedom of religion, allowing women of all ages to enter the Sabarimala Temple.
Writs for Enforcement (Right to Constitutional Remedies):
| Writ | Purpose | When to Use | Example |
| Habeas Corpus | Protects personal liberty by inquiring into the legality of detention. | When an individual is unlawfully detained or arrested without proper justification. | Unlawful arrest or detention. |
| Mandamus | Compels public officials or bodies to perform a duty within their official capacity. | When a public official or authority is not fulfilling a legal duty. | Requiring a government official to process a pending application. |
| Prohibition | Prevents lower courts or tribunals from exceeding their jurisdiction. | When a lower court or tribunal is acting beyond its authority or jurisdiction. | Halting proceedings in a court acting beyond its powers. |
| Certiorari | Quashes the order or decision of an inferior court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial body. | When there’s an error of law on the face of the record and a decision needs to be reviewed. | Challenging a lower court’s decision due to an error of law. |
| Quo Warranto | Inquires into the legality of holding a public office. | When there are doubts about the legality of a person holding a public office. | Challenging a person’s right to hold a public office if they lack the required qualifications. |
Article 32 stands tall as the guardian of fundamental rights, providing a direct route to justice and ensuring constitutional liberties are not mere promises. Through landmark cases and recent developments, it continues to evolve, adapting to the changing socio-legal landscape. As we navigate the intricate tapestry of our constitutional framework, Article 32 remains a beacon, illuminating the path to justice and equality.
Also Read: Articles 29-30
