Question

A person whose petition for Habeas Corpus has been refused by the High Court on merits, seeks to move the Supreme Court by an original petition. According to the constitutional law of India-
A.His petition in the Supreme Court is barred by the rules of res judicata.
B.His petition in maintenance because his right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of his fundamental right is itself a fundamental right which cannot be limited as rules of res judicata
C.He can approach the Supreme Court by appeal
D.He can move the Supreme Court for the same writ because the rules of res judicata will not apply in this case.

Answer 1

Hint:- A writ of habeas corpus which in a real sense intends to "produce the body" is a court request requesting that a public authority, (for example, a superintendent) convey a detained individual to the court and show a legitimate purpose behind that individual's confinement.
-In this case, the person can appeal to the Supreme Court and his case will be reviewed again by the court. It does not matter if the case has already been judged.

Complete answer:
-Res Judicata is an expression which has been advanced from a Latin saying, which means 'the thing has been judged', which means thereby that the issue under the steady gaze of the court has just been chosen by another court, between similar gatherings. Consequently, the court will excuse the case before it as being pointless. Res Judicata as an idea is appropriate both if there should be an occurrence of Civil just as Criminal overall set of laws.
-The regulation of res judicata may not have any significant bearing if a written request under Article 32 of the Constitution is recorded under this Court after removal of a habeas corpus writ appeal under Article 226 of the Constitution by the High Court.
Let us review the options and discuss the answer.
-Option A. In the case of Habeas Corpus writ, it is not affected by the rules of res judicata. So the case is not barred from the Supreme Court. Thus, it is an incorrect option.
-Option C. The person does not have to make an appeal in the Supreme Court for the same writ as it will be taken up by the court without any appeal because it will not be affected by res judicata. Thus, it is an incorrect option.
-Option D. The writ of Habeas Corpus is an issue against the unlawful confinement of any individual. It is immune from the rule of res judicata, which gives that issue once chosen or declined on merits cannot be re-agitated in the equivalent or any court. Thus, the appeal for giving a writ of habeas corpus can be introduced under the steady gaze of the Supreme Court if it is denied by the high court on merits.

Therefore, the correct answer is Option D.

Note: - It was the Ghurlam Sarwar vs. The Union of India and Ors case held on December 15, 1966, that the Apex Court declared that a writ under Article 226 passed in a habeas corpus matter will not constitute res judicata to bar an appeal under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.