Habeas Corpus

Introduction:

Habeas Corpus is an ancient common-law writ which is issued by a court or judge directing the government or the officials to bring the person under arrest before the court or judge to check whether the person has been detained lawfully. It is prevalent mostly among the common law following countries but many civil law countries are bringing similar reforms in their justice systems. In India, it has been used many times by those arrested in different circumstances because of the police brutality and sometimes willful ignorance of the plight of those arrested.

Many times the police violate articles 19, 20 and 21 of the prisoners by torturing them and so it is important to keep a check on them. We will check the different features of this writ, its situation in India, and the relevant cases in this article.   

History of Habeas Corpus

One of the most important of the writs for individual freedom is Habeas Corpus. It is a Latin term which means you may have the body. The constitution of India has given different kinds of fundamental rights to each of its citizens. The implementation of these fundamental rights is defended by applying 5 writs. Writs are requests to the court to order or command certain actions from government organizations for alleged disturbance of the fundamental rights. Article 32 of the constitution gives the right to the individual to move the Supreme Court when they feel that there right has been unduly deprived. The court may then apply any of the writ. Article 226 gives similar power to the High Court. Dr. Ambedkar himself has mentioned the importance of this single article and has said that it is the heart and soul of the constitution and without it, the constitution would be a nullity. Apart from Habeas Corpus, the other four writs are:

1. Quo Warranto:  Quo Warranto is a Latin term which means by what warrant. The writ is used to restrain a person from holding a public office to which he is not entitled. It can be used against offices created by the constitution.
2. Prohibition: Prohibition refers to forbid or stop. The writ is issued by the Supreme Court or high court when a lower court violates the power vested under them thus prohibiting them from continuing the proceedings.
3. Certiorari: It is also a Latin term which means to inform. It is done by the Supreme Court or High court as a judicial order and carried out in original legal proceedings to review the judgment or order given by the lower court.
4. Mandamus: It is a Latin term which means to command. It is a judicial remedy in the form of order to act legally or a command to the lower court or a person to perform his/her public duty.

The modern-day use of Habeas Corpus as an instrument to protect individual freedom dates back to the reign of Henry VII when efforts were made to use it on prisoners imprisoned by the privy council. By the 17^th century, it was recognized and fully established as a procedure for checking the illegal imprisonment of people by the inferior court or the public officials.[1] In India, the writ found its creation through the establishment of High courts in all the presidency cities in 1774.

They were given the power of Habeas Corpus to be used against the company officials. The 44^th amendment to the constitution brought reforms and changed many of the provisions of the restrictive clauses of the 42^nd Amendment. it enforced that during emergency Article 20 and 21 cannot be suspended so the writ of Habeas Corpus can be used in the case of Article 20 even during conflicts or breakdown of the government machinery.

Evolution Through Cases

There have been many cases related to the illegal detention of prisoners in the country. Police have many times exceeded their power. One of the most important cases also called the Habeas Corpus case was Additional District Magistrate Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla [2]. In this, the court held against the writ and said that the right of any person to move any court for any enforcement of the rights conferred by Articles 14, 21, and 22 of the constitution and all proceedings pending in any court would remain suspended during the emergency. It led to many wrongful confinements during the emergency and is one of the unfortunate judgments in the history of the Supreme Court however the 44^th Amendment restored the power of Habeas Corpus during the emergency.

In the case of Sunil Batra vs Delhi Administration, [3] the petitioner talked about the tortures happening in the jail and sent a letter to one of the judge which was converted into a writ petition. The court held that it has the power and responsibility to intervene and protect the prisoner and may use Habeas Corpus for enforcing in prison humanism.

The case of Smt. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa [4] was one of the famous ones which talk about custodial deaths in police stations. In this case, the petitioner’s son was taken away by police for the offense of theft. The next day his body was found near railway tracks. Police claimed he ran away and got hit by a train while the petitioner claimed custodial death. The court converted this case into a writ petition through Habeas Corpus and declared through the wounds and other evidence that it was a custodial death and the people involved should be prosecuted.

Conclusion

Through this article, we can see just how important the clause of Habeas Corpus is to protect a person’s fundamental right to life and personal liberty. We saw its creation in England to protect the prisoners from the excessive powers of King. It stills has the same meaning and is used whenever a person is wrongly detained. We saw through many of the cases as to how the Habeas Corpus writ has been used many times to protect people and ensure the protection of fundamental rights. Just because a person is in jail does not mean that they have to be treated inhumanely. Still, the situation in jails across India is horrendous and many of those detained are pre-trial ones so strong implementation of procedures must be done to ensure the rights of people are protected through writs even if they have done something wrong.      

References:

[1] Jerry Norton, Habeas Corpus, Brittanica, (Apr 25, 2017), https://www.britannica.com/topic/habeas-corpus

[2] 1976 AIR 1207

[3] 1980 AIR 1579

[4] 1993 AIR 1960