Alternative Remedies No Longer Bar Writs Writ Jurisdiction in the Indian Constitution has been borrowed from the concept of prerogative writs under English Law and was vested in the Chartered High Courts prior to commencement of Constitution. The framers of the Constitution adopted the concept of writs and funnelled such powers to fruitfully enforce the fundamental rights... Read More
In the case of National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors., the Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the NCPCR under Article 32, emphasizing that statutory bodies created to protect fundamental rights cannot invoke Article 32 to enforce their mandates against state authorities or private entities. The NCPCR had taken suo motu cognizance of alleged child trafficking by an NGO in Jharkhand and, dissatisfied with the state’s response, sought reliefs including the creation of Special Investigation Teams (SITs) to investigate similar organizations nationwide. The Court held that Article 32 is primarily for individuals to enforce their fundamental rights, not for statutory bodies with dedicated powers under their enabling statutes. It criticized the petition’s vague and broad prayers, pointing out that the NCPCR should use its statutory powers to address child rights violations rather than seek constitutional remedies. This judgment reinforces the limited scope of Article 32 for statutory authorities and the necessity of relying on existing legal mandates.