Constitutional Remedies

what are the Constitutional Remedies under Administrative Law

1. Constitutional remedies Article 32: Right to Constitutional Remedies Article 32 was called "the very soul of the constitution and the very heart of it" by Dr. B R Ambedkar .

2. Right to Constitutional Remedies The right to constitutional remedy was created as one of the main fundamental rights, because the constitution recognized the need to protect the rights of the citizens. In case of any one of the fundamental rights being deprived or denied to the resident of the country, the individual or the party has the right to present their case in a court.

3. In this case, the court has the flexibility to assign writs to the public in the form of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari. In the case of a national emergency, the government has the flexibility to append the right of the citizen. According to Article 32, Indian citizens can stand up and fight for their fundamental rights if they are breached. Today, here we present about the HABEAS CORPUS.

4. Writ General Meaning - a formal order in Writing issued under seal, in the name of a sovereign, government, Court or other authority, commanding an officer or other person to whom it is issued, to do or refrain from doing some act specified therein.

5. JURISDICTION OF WRITS The supreme court of India is alert guardian of fundamental rights of citizens . It is supreme custodian . Article 32 of constitution provides for writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights. Similar, jurisdiction is available to high court under Article 226 . actually, the jurisdiction of high court to issue writ is more wide than that of supreme court. High court can issue writ for 'other purposes' along with fundamental rights, whereas supreme court can only issue writ for the enforcement of fundamental rights

6. TYPES OF WRITS As per Article 32(2) and Article 226(1) of the constitution , the supreme court and high court can issue five types of writs- 1. H abeas corpus 2. M andamus 3. P rohibition 4. C ertiorari 5. Q uo- W arrant

7. WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

8. Writ of Habeas corpus Habeas Corpus means, “ you may have the body ." A person, when arrested, can move the Court for the issue of Habeas Corpus. It is an order by a Court to the detaining authority to produce the arrested person before it so that it may examine whether the person has been detained lawfully or otherwise. If the Court is convinced that the person is illegally detained, it can issue orders for his release.

9. :- The writ requires a person having custody of a prisoner to bring him before the court together with the grounds for his detention. :- The detaining authority must then explain to the court the reasons for the detention. :- If the reasons are “not in accordance with law”, the court has the duty to order the detainee to be released.

10. Who can apply? General rule is that an application can be made by a person who is illegally detained. But in certain cases, an application of habeas corpus can be made by any person on behalf of the prisoner, i.e., a friend or a relation.

11. SUNIL BATRA v/s DELHI ADMINISTRATION (AIR 1980 SC 1579) The Supreme Court enlarged the scope of habeas corpus, making available the fundamental rights of the prisoners .

12. P. S. SADASHIV SWAMI v/s STATE OF TAMIL NADU, (AIR 1974 SC 2271) The Supreme Court gave the meaning of the writ Habeas Corpus in this case- Court can ask the causes of detention of the detained person. Can order to produce the detained person before the court. If the detained person is illegally detained , the court will order that he be released.

13. RE TAN v/s KHALID RAJA HARUN (1988). The burden of proving that the detention is in accordance with law is, in the first instance, on the detaining authority: This burden is discharged simply by producing the detention order.

14. IN KARAM SINGH CASE (1969). The onus then shifts to the detainee, especially if he alleges bad faith. A person released on habeas corpus can sue for damages for the period during which he suffered unlawful imprisonment.

15. TAN HOCK CHAN v/s MENTERI (1994). In India, UK and Malaysia, habeas corpus can be used to challenge the terms and conditions of bail if the amount of surety required is excessive or other pre-conditions result in serious consequences for the liberties of the accused.

16. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION AND PRIVATE INTEREST LITIGATION

17. QUOTATION Rights without remedies are like:- “lights that do not shine” “fires that do not glow”

18. T HANK YOU

19. Submitted to- Mr. SHAHNAWAZ AHMED MALIK (Assistant Professor) (Dept. of Law) A.M.U. CENTRE MALAPPURAM KERALA Submitted by- ABDUL ROUF NAIK GH-9033 14BALLB16 B.A.LLB. ( Hons .) VI Semester