Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
INTRODUCTION
The Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court and High Courts to
issue writs for enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part
III of Indian Constitution.
The writ issued by Supreme Court and High Court differs mainly in three
aspects:
a) The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of fundamental
rights whereas a High Court can issue writs for enforcement of fundamental
rights along with “ for any other purpose” (refers to the enforcement of any legal
right).
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
2
WRITS
TYPES OF WRITS:
An application for habeas corpus can be made by any person on behalf of the
prisoner as well as by the prisoner himself, subject to the rules and conditions
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
3
Thus if a child is forcibly kept apart from his parents, if a man is wrongfully
having her covenant, if, in short, any man, woman or child is or is asserted
issue a writ of habeas corpus to any one who has the aggrieved person in his
custody and have such person brought to the Court and if he is suffering
Legal background
Supreme Court to issue habeas corpus. Since it constituted a part of Part III of
the Constitution, the right to habeas corpus was given to the various High
Courts under Article 226. These provisions made the statutory restriction
a guaranteed right under Article 32, habeas corpus could not be suspended
except under Article 359 read with clause (4) of Article 32, i.e., where
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
4
It is a writ in the nature of calling upon the person who has detained another
to produce the latter before the Court in order to let the Court know the
grounds on which he has been confined and to set him free if there is no legal
justification for the imprisonment. The writ will not lie in the following
circumstances :—
1. If it appears on the face of the record that the detention of the person
which convicted the petitioner, but the mere jurisdiction would not justify
Court which has become final, cannot prefer and maintain a writ of habeas
corpus to assail his detention. A writ of habeas corpus would not lie against a
considered judicial judgment of the High Court on the alleged tenuous ground
legality or otherwise of the detention at the time of the return and not with
Gopalan v. State,4 that if a fresh and valid order justifying the detention was
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
5
made by the time of the return to the writ, the Court cannot release the detenu
whatever might have been the defect of the order in pursuance of which he was
restraint under a law unless the law is unconstitutional or the order is ultra
vires the statute.5 But the petitioner can challenge the constitutionality of a law
in a habeas corpus proceeding and the Court is bound to release him if the law
is held to be unconstitutional.6
4. Under Article 226, a petition for habeas corpus would lie not only where he
Court stated that no petition would lie to Supreme Court under, Article 32 in
the latter case, because Article 32 does not apply unless a "fundamental right"
The writ of habeas corpus is issued by a High Court only when the person or
authority against whom the writ is sought is within the territorial jurisdiction
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
6
of the High Court, on the date of the application as well as at the time when
application for habeas corpus the applicant is released from custody, the
pronounce upon the correctness of the judgment by which habeas corpus has
been refused.8 But a temporary release on bail does not bar an application for
The writ of habeas corpus is in the nature of an order, the effect of which is the
release of the petitioner from custody of any person, or public authority, who
has illegally detained the petitioner. The following grounds may be stated for
(2) The application for the grant of the writ of habeas corpus ordinarily should
be by the husband or wife or father or son of the detenu. Till a few years back
But now the position has completely changed with the pronouncements of the
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
7
from jail or by some other person on his behalf inspired by social objectives can
be taken as a writ-petition.
In Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration II11 the Court initiated the proceedings on
lyer, J. treated the letter as a petition for habeas corpus. He dwelt upon
American cases where the writ of habeas corpus has been issued for the
or educational opportunities.
The law before the liberalisation of locus standi concept in relation to the writ
Hardial Singh12 In this case, fifteen persons were arrested under Section 3 of
the Punjab Public Safety Act, 1947, for being members of the Rastriya Swayam
Sewak Sangh. One Jagdish Mittar of Simla applied for release, of all such
persons under Section 491, Criminal Procedure Code of 1898. The petitioner in
the present case is a resident of Simla. He does not seem even to have been
authorities concerned limiting the right to move petitions under Section 491,
Cr. P.C., 1898, to the detenues, their relations and the most of their friends, I
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
8
understand such is the practice of England and it will save a lot of judicial time
petitions of this nature on behalf of the persons about whose affairs they have
(3) A person has no right to present successive applications for habeas corpus
upon the nature of order. If the order is on merits, it would be a bar, if the
order shows that the dismissal was for the reasons that the petitioner was
except in certain cases. As regards the applicability of res judicata to the writ of
habeas corpus the Supreme Court has engrafted an exception to the effect that
where the petition had been rejected by the High Court, a fresh petition can be
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
9
(4) All the formalities to arrest and detention have not been complied with and
the order of arrest has been made mala fide or for collateral purpose. When a
Magistrate did not report the arrest to the Government of the Province as was
required under Section 3(2) of the Punjab Safety Act, 1947, the detention was
Whether mala fide could be inferred from long delay in communicating the
and with a view to prevent him from taking step to get redress from
Bombay18 without any description of him, is invalid since it may lead to the
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
10
arrest of ‘any person bearing the name. Hence complete description of the
(6) It must be established that the detaining authority was not satisfied that
the detenu was committing prejudicial acts, etc. It may be noted in this
In Icchu Devi v. Union of India,19 the Court emphasized upon the need of serving
on the detenu copies of several documents on whom the authority had relied in
grounds of detention. The Court .pointed out that in case of an application for
a writ of habeas corpus, it does not. as a matter of practice, follow strict rules
of pleading nor does it place undue emphasis on the question on whom the
The Court has consistently shown great anxiety for personal liberty and refused
to dismiss a petition merely on the ground that it does not disclose a prima
facie case invalidating the order of detention. It has adopted the liberal attitude
People in general are poor, illiterate and lack financial resources. It would
18 18 Bom 636.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
11
therefore be not desirable to insist that the petitioner should set out clearly and
The scope of the writ of habeas corpus has considerably increased by virtue of
the decision of the Supreme Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India20 and
of the personal liberty and the Court introduced the element -of fairness and
would lie if the law depriving a person of his personal liberty is not fair, just
Hence the writ of habeas corpus will be available to the people against any
wrongful detention.
Habeas corpus cannot be used as a device to evade the ordinary law for the
particular concern of habeas corpus." For the issue of habeas corpus, the
wrongful restraint must exist at the time when the Court has to make the rule
absolute for its issue. If at the time when the rule for the writ is heard and
decided, detention begun originally under an invalid order, has been put in by a
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
12
proper and valid authority even after the presentation of habeas corpus
remedy, habeas corpus should not be given. But it is the normal rule. If need
HABEAS CORPUS
Introduction - Habeas corpus is a Latin term which literally means " have the
body", “Have his body”, “Bring the body”. The concept of writ of habeas corpus
has originated from England. This is a writ or legal action which can be used
by a person to seek relief from illegal detention.
PURPOSE
The writ is a direction of the Court to a person who is detaining another,
commanding him to bring the body of the person in his custody at a specified
time to a specified place for a specified purpose. Examples are as follows :-
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
13
(f) Testing the validity of detention by the executive during emergency, etc.
A writ of habeas corpus has only one purpose: to set at liberty a person who is
confined without legal justification; to secure release from confinement of a
person unlawfully detained. 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. The writ is
issued not only against authorities of the State but also to private individuals
or organizations if necessary.
Facts of PIL -
b) The petitioner stated in her letter that she interviewed fifteen women
prisoners in the Bombay Central Jail with the permission of the
Inspector General of Prisons between 11 and 17th May, 1982 and five out
of them told her that they had been assaulted by the police in the police
lock up.
c) Of these five who complained of having been assaulted by the police, the
petitioner particularly mentioned the cases of two, namely, Devamma
and Pushpa Paeen who were allegedly assaulted and tortured whilst they
were in the police lock up.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
14
2. Writ of Mandamus
Introduction - The Latin word 'mandamus' means 'we command'. The writ of
'mandamus' is an order of the High Court or the Supreme Court commanding
a person or a body to do its duty. Usually, it is an order directing the
performance of ministerial acts. A ministerial act is one which a person or
body is obliged by law to perform under given circumstances.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
15
Rajasthan.
2. That The incident reveals the hazards to which a working woman may be
exposed and the depravity to which sexual harassment can degenerate; and
legislative measures.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
16
violation of the victim's fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) 'to practice
supreme court by filing PIL for redress under Article 32, an effective redressal
requires that some guidelines should be laid down for the protection of these
ISSUES INVOLVED-
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
17
3. Writ of Certiorari
Introduction - Certiorari means to be certified. It is issued by the higher
court to the lower court either to transfer the case pending with the latter to
itself or to squash the order already passed by an inferior court, tribunal or
quasi judicial authority. The conditions necessary for the issue of writ of
certiorari.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
18
b. Such a court, tribunal or officer must have passed order acting without
jurisdiction or in excess of the judicial authority vested by law in such court,
tribunal or officer.
c. The order could also be against the principles of natural justice or the order
could contain an error of judgment in appreciating the facts of the case.
4. Writ of Prohibition
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
19
from holding a public office to which he is not entitled. The writ requires the
concerned person to explain to the Court by what authority he holds the office.
If a person has usurped a public office, the Court may direct him not to carry
out any activities in the office or may announce the office to be vacant. Thus
High Court may issue a writ of quo-warranto if a person holds an office beyond
his retirement age.
http://gsupsc.blogspot.in/2013/04/writs-in-indian-constitution.html
(c) The Fundamental Rights provided to the citizens by the Constitution cannot
be suspended by the State, except during the period of emergency, as laid down
in Article 359 of the Constitution. A Fundamental Right may also be enforced
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
20
Under Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a writ against any person or
government within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a
Fundamental Right has been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse
relief on the ground that the aggrieved person may have remedy before some
other court or under the ordinary law. The relief can also not be denied on the
ground that the disputed facts have to be investigated or some evidence has to
be collected. Even if an aggrieved person has not asked for a particular writ,
the Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, may grant
the appropriate writ and may even modify it to suit the exigencies of the case.
Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move the Court. But it has
been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest matters, any
one may move the Court. Any piece of legislation or law, which tends to
interfere with the power of Supreme Court under Article 32 shall be declared as
void. Hence, there is no way that the legislative or the executive authority can
by-pass the power and responsibility entrusted to the Supreme Court by the
Constitution. In a famous case titled as "Gopalan Vs State of Madras", the
Supreme Court declared Section 14 of the Preventive Detention Act of 1950 as
void, because as per the Supreme Court, the said Section acted as an iron
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
21
curtain around the acts of the executive authority making the order of
preventive detention.
WRITS
3. The Writ of Quo-Warranto : The word Quo-Warranto literally means "by what
warrants?" It is a writ issued with a view to restraining a person from acting in
a public office to which he is not entitled. The writ of quo- warranto is used to
prevent illegal assumption of any public office or usurpation of any public
office by anybody. For example, a person of 62 years has been appointed to fill
a public office whereas the retirement age is 60 years. Now, the appropriate
High Court has a right to issue a writ of quo-warranto against the person and
declare the office vacant.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com
22
grounds at a later stage. It can also be said that the writ of prohibition is
available during the tendency of proceedings before a sub-ordinate court,
certiorari can be resorted to only after the order or decision has been
announced. There are several conditions necessary for the issue of writ of
certiorari, which are as under: (a) There should be court, tribunal or an officer
having legal authority to determine the question of deciding fundamental rights
with a duty to act judicially. (b) Such a court, tribunal or officer must have
passed an order acting without jurisdiction or in excess of the judicial
authority vested by law in such court, tribunal or law. The order could also be
against the principle of natural justice or it could contain an error of judgment
in appreciating the facts of the case.
Shubhammodi93@gmail.com