Introduction:

Suppose the Government decides to enact a law similar to the Rowlatt Act of 1919, allowing detention of any person for up to two years without trial. Imagine you are detained during that period, and for an entire year, nobody knows where you are, with suspicions even arising that you were murdered in police custody. What will you do? What is the remedy that your family and friends have to ensure that you are well and good? Here comes writs, the saviour of our fundamental rights

Fundamental Rights are one of the most important parts of the Indian Constitution, and they came after a lot of hard-fought struggle. Under British rule, we were denied basic rights such as equality and freedom, so people rose up and fought for them. The makers of our Constitution took all those sacrifices to heart and wrote these rights into law to protect justice, liberty, and equality for every citizen. That’s why the Fundamental Rights section is considered the foundation of India’s democracy; it reflects the nation’s deep desire for dignity and fairness. Thus preserveing these fundamental rights were important, promotion the incorporation of writs as a constitutional remedy. Writs work as a shield for citizens, serving as powerful legal instruments to protect fundamental rights, prevent the abuse of power by state authorities, and ensure justice. In India, prerogative writs were introduced during British rule, with the Supreme Court in Calcutta, established by the Regulating Act of 1773, having the power to issue them within its jurisdiction. Post-independence, the Indian Constitution incorporated the power to issue writs to protect citizens’ rights.

Types Of Writs:

Under article 32 and 226 of Indian constitution both supreme court and High court can impose writs to revive fundamental rights respectively.

Let’s first look into the part most people ignore in topic of writs are the exception to writs . Exceptions to writs  generally involve situations where they can’t be issued against private individuals, heads of state (President/Governor), discretionary functions, contractual matters, or when other remedies exist.

The five type of writs are as follows:

• Habeas corpus: Literally “produce the body” it’s a go to remedy whenever a person is illegally detained. If founded that the person if being illegally detained by any authority or private body the court must set the person free . There are some expectations to this writ such as  it can’t apply to lawful detention or contempt of court, and courts can refuse writs for delay, frivolous claims. ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (AIR 1976 SC 1207), was a landmark judgement of the Supreme Court of India pertaining to the suspension of Articles 21 and 226 of the Indian Constitution in the event of a National Emergency. This controversial judgment of P.N. Bhagwati, decreed during the emergency from 25 June 1975 to 21 March 1977, held that a person’s right to not be unlawfully detained (i.e. habeas corpus) can be suspended in the interest of the State

• Mandamus(“we command”): Is a court order that compels a public authority a government officer, agency, local body, or even a lower court to perform a *legal duty* it is bound to do. It won’t lie if the duty is discretionary or if there’s an alternative remedy available. It also can’t be used against private parties or to enforce a contract. Sohan Lal v. Union of India (1957 AIR 529) is a landmark Indian Supreme Court case limiting writ jurisdiction (Article 226) for property disputes with complex facts or private rights, establishing that matters of title and possession should go to civil courts, not writ courts

• Prohibition – “Forbid”

Prohibition is a writ issued by a higher court (the Supreme Court under Article 32 or a High Court (under Article 226) to a lower court, tribunal or quasi-judicial authority, directing it to stop a proceeding that falls outside its jurisdiction. It is meant to keep inferior courts and tribunals within the bounds of their authority

East India Commercial Co. v. Collector of Customs (1962 AIR 1893)– The Supreme Court prohibited a customs authority from imposing a penalty because the statute did not confer jurisdiction on it. The decision clarified that prohibition is available when there is an excess of jurisdiction or a breach of natural justice It cannot be issued to a court exercising purely judicial functions unless there

• Certiorari – “To be certified”

Certiorari is a writ issued by a higher court (Supreme Court under Article 32 or High Court under Article 226) to a lower court, tribunal or quasi-judicial authority, ordering it to send up the record of a case so that the higher court can review it and, if necessary, quash the decision. It is used to correct jurisdictional errors, violations of natural justice, or manifest illegality apparent on the face of the record

A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (AIR 1970 SC 150) – The Supreme Court issued certiorari to quash a selection board’s decision because it violated the rule against bias. This case widened the scope of certiorari to administrative actions that affect rights, confirming that the writ reaches any body performing a quasi-judicial function.

• Quo Warranto – “By what authority?”

Quo warranto is a writ issued by a higher court to call into question the legal right of a person to hold a public office. The court asks the office-holder to show by what authority he or she occupies the position. If the authority is found lacking — for example, the appointment violated the Constitution, a statute or eligibility rules — the court can declare the office vacant.

University of Mysore v. Govinda Rao (1965 AIR 491) – The Supreme Court issued quo warranto to remove a professor who was appointed as Vice-Chancellor despite not fulfilling the statutory qualifications. The judgment clarified that the writ protects public offices from usurpation and ensures that mandatory eligibility conditions are strictly followed.

Practical Uses Of Writs:

Let’s look back to the question we raised in first para of introduction now we have the answer to it the remedy for such illegal detention will be the writ of habeas corpus.

Now let’s think you have applied for a trade license in the suitable authority but due to some personal problem with you they are withholding the application and slowing the process what can we do? We can file a writ of mandamus by which the court will order the suitable authority to do his work .  Mandamus also give court a real power to get there order complied what will courts do if a authority refuses to compile to courts order contempt of court can be issue but it won’t assure the compliance of the order there they can issue writ of mandamus to assure that the justice is done and the courts order are being applied

Writ of prohibition  

Imagine a Civil Judge (Junior Division) starts hearing a case involving a serious offence like rape, which carries a punishment of more than 7 years. The Civil Judge doesn’t have jurisdiction to try such cases, as it’s beyond their authority. In this scenario, the High Court can issue a writ of prohibition, stopping the Civil Judge from proceeding with the case. This ensures the judge doesn’t overstep their jurisdiction and prevents potential miscarriage of justice.

Example: A Civil Judge in Delhi starts hearing a kidnapping case, which is a serious offence triable by a Sessions Court. The accused’s lawyer files a writ of prohibition in the Delhi High Court, arguing the Civil Judge lacks jurisdiction.

Writ of certiorari

A writ of certiorari is used to review decisions of lower courts or tribunals. Let’s say a municipal corporation cancels a business license without giving the owner a fair hearing. The owner can approach the High Court, arguing the decision was arbitrary and violated natural justice.

The High Court can issue a writ of certiorari, asking the corporation to produce the records. If the court finds the decision was indeed unfair, it’ll quash the order, and the corporation will have to reconsider the case, following proper procedures.

Example: XYZ Restaurant’s license was cancelled by the municipal corporation without notice or hearing. The owner approaches the High Court, which issues a writ of certiorari. The court reviews the records and finds the corporation didn’t follow due process. The cancellation order is quashed, and the corporation must re-examine the case.

WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO

A writ of quo warranto challenges someone’s right to hold a public office. Let’s say a person is appointed as a university vice-chancellor, despite not meeting the required qualifications. An aggrieved party can approach the High Court, seeking a writ of quo warranto.

The court will ask the vice-chancellor to produce documents proving their eligibility. If they fail to satisfy the court, the appointment can be declared invalid.

Example: Dr. Smith is appointed as a university vice-chancellor, but they don’t have the required 10 years of teaching experience. A professor files a writ of quo warranto in the High Court. The court asks Dr. Smith to produce proof of experience. Since they can’t, the appointment is quashed, and the position is declared vacant.

Current Scenario Regarding Writs:

Across all High Courts, Indians have been filing 6.85 to 7.5 lakh writ cases each year with a drop in Q2 of 2020 i.e. the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic

1.Writ cases filed went up 27% in 2021-22, almost recovering to pre-COVID-19 levels

2.2020-21 (the period immediately following the Mar-Jun ’20 national lockdown) saw a 16% drop in writ cases filed

Note: These case institution figures have been provided for a July to June cycle as per the Supreme Court Annual Reports.

What share of cases instituted in High Courts are writs?

Taking the aggregate of cases instituted over the seven years from 2015 to 2022, anywhere from 20% and 60% of cases filed in each High Court were writ cases . 89% of identified writ cases were civil.  Majority work of supreme court and High court are regarding writs.

Need of the hour:

INDIA with a population of nearly 1.5 billion people is the largest country and democracy in the world . It have 25 high courts for 28 states and 8 UTs but only have 1 supreme court which make it challenging for both the judiciary and people seeking justice . Supreme court is dealing with overload of work which is effecting it’s efficiency to deliver justice on time . To address these concern it is need of the hour to expend writ jurisdiction to each district by which it will be easy for everyone to get justice on time as the load of writs cases will decrees on supreme court it would have time to hear other matters fast and people can get justice fast

Conclusion:

The writ jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 stands as the cornerstone of India’s constitutional democracy, ensuring that fundamental rights are not mere promises but enforceable guarantees. By empowering the Supreme Court and High Courts to issue writs, the Constitution provides citizens with swift remedies against unlawful detention, administrative arbitrariness, and usurpation of public office. Each writ—habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, and quo warranto—serves as a vital safeguard, collectively forming a robust shield against misuse of power. Historical struggles for liberty and equality culminated in this framework, reflecting the nation’s commitment to justice and dignity.  Expanding writ jurisdiction to district levels could decentralize justice, reduce delays, and strengthen accessibility. Ultimately, writs embody the living spirit of the Constitution, ensuring that the rule of law prevails and citizens’ rights remain inviolable.  

Disclaimer: This article is intended solely for educational and informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. While every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and completeness of the information provided, ClearLaw.online, the author, and the publisher disclaim any liability for errors, omissions, or inadvertent inaccuracies. Readers are strongly advised to consult a qualified legal professional for guidance on any specific legal issue or matter.