Skip to main content

Constitutional Remedies to Protect Fundamental Rights

 Constitutional remedies to protect fundamental rights

The right to get constitutional remedies to give citizens the right to appear in Supreme Court and High Court to get the fundamental rights restored in case they are violated In the constitution of India article 12 to 35 states the fundamental rights of people of India. There are  four articles in the Indian constitution which protects the fundamental rights of people. They are as follows-

Article 13: This Article provides for the Judicial review. Articles 13 states that the laws whether pre- constitutional or post- constitutional, if against the fundamental rights they will be treated as invalid. 

Article 359: The Article 359 provides that fundamental rights can not be denied to the citizens of India except in any emergency ( National Emergency, State Emergency, and Financial Emergency). 

Article 32 & 226:  Provides for the writs. Article 32 deals with the constitution remedies and provides the right to move to the Supreme Court. Article 226 provides for the right to move to the High Court in violation of any fundamental rights. Article 32 is itself a fundamental right. Article 32 & Article 226 provides for five types of Writs to protect the fundamental rights given under the constitution ( Article  12 to 35). They are as follows-

  • Habeas Corpus – It is a Latin phrase, it means ‘ to have to body’. If a person is illegally detained then the relatives of the person can file a writ petition before the Supreme Court or the High Court to release the person. When a writ of habeas corpus Is fired before the court, the court questions though authority on what grounds the person is detained. If the grounds are found unreasonable then the detention is ends.

  • Mandamus- It is a Latin term. It means ‘ we command'. By the Writ of Mandamus every public institutions can be commanded to follow their Public Duty. To file a writ of Mandamus the public duty should be there.

  • Prohibition- The writ of Prohibition means ‘To Forbids. Prohibition is used until the lower court has announced its judgement. The writ of Prohibition stops a Court to give judgement, when the court don’t have jurisdiction to decide any case.

  • Certiorari- It is also a Latin term. The writ of Certiorari is almost similar to the writ of Prohibition. The word Certiorari means ‘to be certified’ . After filing the writ of Certiorari the Supreme Court and High Court can order the lower courts to submit their decision so that the High Court and the Supreme Court can review the judgement to see whether there is lack of Jurisdiction, or excess of Jurisdiction, or unconstitutional Jurisdiction or if there is any violation of natural justice. If any of such things happen the judgement will be quashed.

  • Quo- warranto- The writ of Quo- Warranto means ‘ by what authority’. In this writ the courts can question any public officer that by what authority the public officer is holding the office. And if the title of the officer proved defective then he have to vacate the public office. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more