Difference Between Article 32 and Article 226

The Indian Constitution provides a robust framework for the protection and enforcement of fundamental rights, ensuring that citizens have a mechanism to seek redress when these rights are violated. Among the constitutional provisions that empower individuals to seek legal remedies, Article 32 and Article 226 play a pivotal role. These articles grant the Supreme Court and High Courts the power to issue writs, thereby reinforcing the fundamental rights of individuals. While both articles aim at the protection of rights, they differ significantly in terms of scope, jurisdiction, and applicability.

What is Article 32?

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is a fundamental right enshrined under Part III. It is often referred to as the “Heart and Soul of the Constitution”, a term coined by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, as it provides the necessary mechanism for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

Key Features of Article 32

1. Enforcement of Fundamental Rights – Article 32 allows an individual to directly approach the Supreme Court when their fundamental rights are violated.
2. Supreme Court’s Writ Jurisdiction – The Supreme Court has the authority to issue five types of writs to enforce these rights:
   • Habeas Corpus – Ensures personal liberty and prevents illegal detention.
   • Mandamus – Compels a public authority to perform its duty.
   • Quo Warranto – Prevents unauthorised persons from holding a public office.
   • Prohibition – Restrains a lower court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction.
   • Certiorari – Enables higher courts to review and quash decisions of lower courts or administrative bodies.
3. No Discretionary Power – Since it is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court cannot refuse to entertain a petition under Article 32 if fundamental rights have been violated.
4. Suspension During Emergency – Article 32 can be suspended during a national emergency under Article 359.

Landmark Cases on Article 32

• Fertilizer Corporation Kamgar Union v. Union of India – The Supreme Court held that Article 32 is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be abrogated.
• Ramdas Athawale v. Union of India – Clarified that Article 32 is applicable only in cases of fundamental rights violations.
• PUDR v. Union of India – Established that Article 32 can also be invoked against private individuals in certain cases.

What is Article 226?

Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and other legal rights. Unlike Article 32, it is not a fundamental right but a constitutional remedy.

Key Features of Article 226

1. Broader Scope – Article 226 not only covers fundamental rights but also legal rights granted under statutes, making it more extensive in nature.
2. Jurisdiction of High Courts – High Courts can issue writs to any person, authority, or government:
   • Within their territorial jurisdiction.
   • Outside their territorial jurisdiction, if the cause of action arises within their jurisdiction.
3. Discretionary Power – Unlike Article 32, High Courts have the discretion to entertain or reject petitions under Article 226.
4. No Suspension During Emergency – The powers under Article 226 cannot be suspended, even during a national emergency.

Landmark Cases on Article 226

• Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India – Established that Article 226 has a wider scope than Article 32 as it can enforce legal rights.
• Hemendra Nath Pathak v. Gauhati University – Mandated the issuance of writ of mandamus against a university that failed to act as per statutory provisions.
• Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai – Clarified that writs under Article 226 can be issued against judicial bodies only in certain circumstances.

Key Differences Between Article 32 and Article 226

The Indian Constitution provides two significant legal remedies for protecting rights—Article 32 and Article 226. While both empower courts to issue writs for the enforcement of rights, they differ in their nature, scope, jurisdiction, and applicability. Below is a detailed explanation of each key difference.

Nature

• Article 32: It is a fundamental right enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. This means every citizen has an inherent right to approach the Supreme Court when their fundamental rights are violated.
• Article 226: It is a constitutional right, not a fundamental right. This means approaching the High Court under this article is not an absolute right, and the High Court has discretion in hearing the petition.

Scope

• Article 32: Limited to cases where fundamental rights are violated. No remedy is available for breaches of ordinary legal rights.
• Article 226: Has a broader scope—it applies to both fundamental rights and legal rights. This means that if an individual’s legal rights (granted under a statute) are violated, they can seek remedy under Article 226.

Jurisdiction

• Article 32: The Supreme Court has the power to enforce fundamental rights across all of India. Any citizen can approach the Supreme Court irrespective of where the violation occurred.
• Article 226: The High Courts can issue writs within their territorial jurisdiction. However, they can also issue writs outside their jurisdiction if the cause of action arises within their state.

Discretionary Power

• Article 32: The Supreme Court cannot refuse to hear a case under Article 32 if a fundamental right is violated. Since it is a fundamental right, the court must entertain the petition.
• Article 226: The High Court has discretion to entertain a petition. It may choose to reject a case if it believes the petitioner has alternative remedies or if it is not a matter of urgency.

Suspension During Emergency

• Article 32: Can be suspended during a national emergency under Article 359. This means that fundamental rights enforcement may be temporarily paused in certain emergency situations.
• Article 226: Cannot be suspended, even during an emergency. The High Court retains its power to issue writs even when fundamental rights enforcement is restricted under Article 32.

Types of Rights Enforced

• Article 32: Enforces only fundamental rights (e.g., Right to Equality, Right to Life, Right to Freedom).
• Article 226: Enforces both fundamental rights and legal rights (e.g., statutory rights such as employment rights, property rights, and administrative justice).

Territorial Jurisdiction

• Article 32: The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over all of India.
• Article 226: The High Court’s jurisdiction is limited to its state but can extend beyond if the cause of action arises within its jurisdiction.

Importance of Article 32 and Article 226

Both Article 32 and Article 226 play a crucial role in ensuring justice and safeguarding the rights of citizens. They act as effective tools against arbitrary actions by the government and provide mechanisms to challenge illegal detentions, abuse of power, and unlawful decisions by authorities.

Why Article 32 is Important?

• Guarantees the enforcement of fundamental rights.
• Provides direct access to the Supreme Court.
• Forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Why Article 226 is Important?

• Wider scope as it extends to legal rights.
• High Courts can issue writs even if the case involves non-fundamental rights.
• Ensures that justice is accessible at the state level.

Conclusion

While Article 32 and Article 226 serve the common purpose of upholding constitutional and legal rights, they differ in various aspects, such as jurisdiction, scope, discretionary power, and suspension during emergencies. Article 32 is a fundamental right that guarantees direct access to the Supreme Court for fundamental rights violations, whereas Article 226 is a constitutional right with broader applicability.

Both provisions are indispensable to India’s democratic framework, ensuring that the judiciary remains a guardian of justice, fairness, and individual liberty. Understanding the distinction between them helps in appreciating their respective roles and the avenues available for individuals seeking legal remedies against injustices.

In conclusion, Article 32 remains the cornerstone for fundamental rights enforcement at the national level, while Article 226 provides a broader and more flexible remedy at the state level. Together, they ensure that the Constitution remains a living document that continuously protects the rights of individuals against misuse of power and injustice.