top of page

Case Commentary: Umedsinha P. Chavda Vs. Union Of India & Others, 2020




Pankhuri Srivastava, Bharati Vidyapeeth Deemed University, New Delhi

CASE NAME – Umedsinha P. Chavda v. Union of India & Others, 2020 CITATION – (2020) 6 SSC 346 DECIDED ON – 11th June, 2020 BENCH - JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA, JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI PETITIONER – UMEDSINH P. CHAVDA RESPONDENTS – UNION OF INDIA & ORS. PROVISIONS INVOLVED – Article 32 of the Constitution of India, 1949


BACKGROUND OF THE CASE:

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution has widened the scope for citizens of India to raise their voice directly in front of the honorable Supreme Court, in case there is any violation of their fundamental rights. Article 32 provides a guaranteed right to move to the Supreme Court through appropriate proceedings for enforcement of one's fundamental rights consecrated under Part III of the Constitution. However, sometimes exploitation of Article 32 has been witnessed where petitioner wrongly invokes the jurisdiction, adding further burden on existing pending matters before the Court. Here, in Umedsinha P. Chavda v. Union of India & Others, 2020, the petitioner claiming himself to be a ‘social worker’ has filed the case without any previous technical knowledge specifically targeting two brands, where, the Honorable Supreme Court came down heavily on the Petitioner for erroneously invoking such jurisdiction.

WHAT IS ARTICLE 32?

If I was asked to name any particular Article in this Constitution as the most important – an Article without which this Constitution would be a nullity – I could not refer to any other Article except this one.... It is the very soul of the Constitution and the very heart of it, “Dr. Ambedkar.

As said, if there is no remedy there is no right, our constitution framers have incorporated a long list of fundamental rights and have also provided the effective remedy for the enforcement of those rights under Article 32 of the constitution. Article 32 is a fundamental right in itself.

Article 32(1) of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to directly approach the Supreme Court by the appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the fundamental rights laid down in part III of the Constitution. Under clause (2) of Article 32 the Supreme Court has the power to issue the suitable writs, which include writs in the nature of mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, habeas corpus and quo-warranto. Any citizen if proved that his fundamental rights have been violated or infringed can reach the court for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by part III of the Constitution of India.

Under Article 32(3) Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under clause (2). Under clause 4 of Article 32 it is said that all the rights provided under Article 32 shall not be suspended unless provided for by the constitution.

Commentaires


Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research

Abbreviation: IJLLR

ISSN: 2582-8878

Website: www.ijllr.com

Accessibility: Open Access

License: Creative Commons 4.0

Submit Manuscript: Click here

Open Access Logo

Licensing:

​All research articles published in The Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research are fully open access. i.e. immediately freely available to read, download and share. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the IJLLR or its members. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of material therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the IJLLR.

bottom of page