Article 32 confers the right to remedies for enforcement of the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen. 

Dr. B R Ambedkar called Article 32 as the most important article of the Constitution –

The Supreme Court has ruled that Article 32 is a ‘basic feature‘ of the Constitution. Hence, it cannot taken away even by way of an amendment to the Constitution. 

I. The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights is guaranteed.

II. The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights. The writs issued may include habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari and quo-warranto.

III. Parliament can empower any other court to issue directions, orders and writs of all kinds. However, this can be done without prejudice to the above powers conferred on the Supreme Court. Any other court here does not include high courts because Article 226 has already conferred these powers on the high court.

IV. The right to move the Supreme Court shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by the Constitution. Thus the Constitution provides that the President can suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights during a national emergency (Article 359).

Above these provisions clear that the Supreme Court has been constituted as the defender and guarantor of the fundamental rights of the citizens.

In the same way High Courts in India are also empowered to issue writs under Article 226 for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.

Right to constitutional remedies is the means through which this is to be achieved. 

Dr. Ambedkar considered the right to constitutional remedies as ‘heart and soul of the constitution’. 

It is so because this right gives a
citizen the right to approach a High Court or the Supreme Court to get any of the fundamental rights restored in case of their violation. The Supreme Court and the High Courts can issue orders and give directives to the government for the enforcement of rights.

The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is original (an aggrieved citizen can directly go to the Supreme Court) but not exclusive. It is concurrent with the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Article 226.

It means when the Fundamental Rights of a citizen are violated, the aggrieved party has the option of moving either the high court or the Supreme Court directly.

There are five types of Writs – 

1. Habeas Corpus :

• It is a Latin word which literally means “to have the body of.” 

• The writ is issued to produce a person who has been detained, whether in public custody/prison or private custody, before a court and to release him if such detention is found illegal.

• This writ is an individual liberty against arbitrary detention.

• This writ available against public as well as private.

2. Mandamus :

• Mandamus is a Latin word, which means “We Command“.

• This writ issue to perform Public duty.

• It can be issued against any public authority, a corporation, an interior court, a tribunal or government for the same purpose.

3. Prohibition :

• The writ of Prohibition literally means “to forbid” or “to stop” or popularly known as “stay order“.

• It is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal.

• To prevent the latter of exceeding its jurisdiction or usurping a jurisdiction that it does not possess.

• It can be issued only against judicial or quasi judicial authorities.

4. Certiorari :

• Certiorari literally means “to be certified” or “to be informed”.

• It is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal.

• To nullify case or transfering the cases one court to others.

• It is also issued only against judicial or quasi judicial authorities.

Note : The minor differences between Prohibition and Certiorari is – the Prohibition is only preventive, while Certiorari is both preventive as well Curative.

5. Quo-warranto :

• In the literal sense, it means “by what authority or warrant ?”.

• The writ requires the concerned person to explain to the court by what authority he holds the office. 

• It prevents illegal usurpation of public office by a person.

• this writ can be sought by any interested person and not necessarily by aggrieved person.