Part III — Fundamental Rights

Article 32 — Right to Constitutional Remedies

Article 32 is the right to move the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of any fundamental right. B. R. Ambedkar called it the 'heart and soul of the Constitution.' It empowers the Court to issue writs — habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto — and cannot be suspended except during an Emergency.

Timeline

24 April 1973

Kesavananda Bharati: Basic Structure doctrine established

In a 7:6 majority, the Supreme Court held in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala that while Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, it cannot alter its 'basic structure' — features like judicial review, federalism, and fundamental rights. It remains the most consequential constitutional judgment in Indian history.

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461

26 November 1949

Constitution of India adopted

The Constituent Assembly adopted the Constitution of India, drafted under the chairmanship of Dr B.R. Ambedkar. It came into force on 26 January 1950. The Constitution established India as a sovereign democratic republic.

Constitution of India, Preamble

Constitutional text

(1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.

(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this Part.

(3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) and (2), Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2).

(4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution.

Source: Constitution of India, as published by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

History and context

Ambedkar described Article 32 on 17 December 1946 as 'the most important article of the Constitution — without this, the Constitution is a nullity.' The provision was modelled on the prerogative writs of English common law and the US right of access to courts. The Habeas Corpus case (Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla, 1976) saw a four-to-one majority hold that habeas corpus could be suspended during the Emergency — a ruling widely regarded as the Supreme Court's darkest hour and since disavowed in Puttaswamy (2017). Article 32 cannot be watered down by Parliament but can be temporarily suspended during a proclaimed Emergency under Article 359.

Key Supreme Court cases

Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla (Habeas Corpus case) (1976)

Held (4-1) that the right to move courts against illegal detention was suspended during the Emergency of 1975–77; H. R. Khanna's dissent is celebrated.

Fertilizer Corporation Kamgar Union v. Union of India (1981)

Confirmed that Article 32 petitions require enforcement of a fundamental right, not mere statutory or contractual rights.

Last reviewed: 1 June 2026

Continue exploring

Explore the questions, politicians, and topics connected to Article 32.