In the Constitution of India, which Fundamental Right allows a citizen to move the court if they believe that any of their Fundamental Rights have been violated by the State authorities?

Introduction / Context:

The Constitution of India gives citizens several Fundamental Rights that can be enforced against the State. Simply granting rights is not enough; people must also have an effective way to protect those rights when they are violated. This question tests your understanding of the Fundamental Right that empowers citizens to approach the courts directly if any of their Fundamental Rights are infringed by State action. Knowing this right is essential for examinations on Indian Polity and for understanding how constitutional remedies work in practice.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The context is the Fundamental Rights chapter of the Constitution of India.
• A citizen believes that a Fundamental Right has been violated by the State.
• The citizen wants to move the court for protection and enforcement of that right.
• The options list different categories of Fundamental Rights recognised in the Constitution.

Concept / Approach:

The correct approach is to recall the classification of Fundamental Rights and identify which one explicitly deals with the enforcement of other Fundamental Rights through the courts. The Right to Constitutional Remedies, provided mainly under Article 32, allows a person to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. High Courts have a similar power under Article 226, but the named Fundamental Right is the Right to Constitutional Remedies. Dr B R Ambedkar described Article 32 as the heart and soul of the Constitution because it makes Fundamental Rights meaningful by giving citizens a direct route to the Supreme Court for protection.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:

You can verify this by remembering that Article 32 explicitly grants the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights, and this Article falls under the Right to Constitutional Remedies. Further, most standard Indian Polity textbooks clearly classify enforcement of Fundamental Rights under this head and quote Dr B R Ambedkar, who emphasised that without this right, all other rights would be reduced to mere paper declarations. This confirms that the correct answer is the Right to Constitutional Remedies.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Option A, Cultural and Educational Rights, mainly protect the rights of minorities and groups to conserve their language, script, and culture and to establish and administer educational institutions. They do not, by themselves, give a general right to move the court for any violation. Option C, Right against Exploitation, focuses on prohibiting trafficking, forced labour, and child labour, not on providing a general remedy. Option D, Right to Freedom of Religion, guarantees freedom of conscience and the right to profess, practise, and propagate religion, but again it is a substantive right, not the overarching remedial right. None of these expressly define the mechanism of approaching the court for enforcement of all Fundamental Rights.

Common Pitfalls:

A common mistake is to assume that any Fundamental Right can automatically be used as a remedy just because the courts are mentioned somewhere in the Constitution. Some learners also confuse the Right to Constitutional Remedies with the Right to Equality or the Right to Freedom because these are frequently litigated in courts. However, the exam expects you to know the specific nomenclature and classification of rights. Another error is to assume that the power of High Courts under Article 226 is a separate Fundamental Right, but in reality the named Fundamental Right is the Right to Constitutional Remedies, mainly linked with Article 32.

Final Answer:

The Fundamental Right that allows citizens to move the court when their Fundamental Rights are violated is the Right to Constitutional Remedies.