Compensatory jurisprudence
Also called: Constitutional tort · Topic: Fundamental Rights and Constitutional Remedies · NCERT: Beyond NCERT
Meaning
Compensatory jurisprudence is the power of courts to order the State to pay money to a person whose fundamental rights it has violated. It is also called constitutional tort (a tort is a civil wrong that causes harm). The Constitution does not list it. Courts built it through their power to protect rights under Articles 32 and 226. It matters because releasing a victim or quashing an order does not undo the harm already done. Money gives real relief and makes the State answerable.
Example
In Rudul Sah (1983), a man was kept in jail for 14 years after a court had acquitted him. The Supreme Court ordered the State to pay him compensation. In Nilabati Behera (1993), the Court held that the State cannot use sovereign immunity (the old idea that the government cannot be sued for acts done as a ruler) to escape paying.
Don't confuse with
- Ordinary suit for damages: an ordinary civil case for money, filed in a lower court under ordinary law. Compensatory jurisprudence is a public-law remedy that the Supreme Court or a High Court gives directly in writ cases about fundamental rights.
Related concepts
- Right to constitutional remedies
- Writ
- Habeas corpus
- Mandamus
- Writ of prohibition
- Certiorari
- Quo warranto
- Writ jurisdiction of High Courts