A writ petition is a filing that a party makes with an appeals court in order to secure a speedy review of some issue.

Writ petitions are facets of English common law, and are used in legal systems following the common law model, including those of the United States, Australia, and India. A writ petition is essentially a court petition for extraordinary review, asking a court to intervene in a lower courts decision. Writ practice is governed by a complicated set of rules and specifications that varies by jurisdiction. Most writ petitions are unsuccessful, regardless of where filed. There are several different kinds of writ petition, but all have one thing in common: they are asking an appellate-level court to take some extraordinary action, and intervene in another courts process to institute some higher legal remedy or legal relief.
A writ of habeas corpus (English pronunciation: /hebis krps/; Latin: "may you have the body") is a writ (legal action) that requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court. The principle of habeas corpus ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detentionthat is, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to the prisoner's aid. This right originated in the English legal system, and is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.
[1][2]

Suo motu, meaning "on its own motion," is a Latin legal term, approximately equivalent to the English term sua sponte. It is used, for example, where a government agency acts on its own cognizance, as in "the Commission took suo motu control over the matter." When a court pics up a case without having victim approached it, it is called suo moto. There have been instances when judges issued notices to offending parties based on newpaper clipping/report.

Many legal systems throughout the world retain the use of Latin words or phrases that originated centuries ago in the legal system of ancient Rome. The term "suo moto" is one of those terms. Literally translated, it means "on its own motion," and the term generally refers to a situation wherein a judge acts without request by either party to the action before the court.
Public-Interest Litigation (PIL, or ) is litigation for the protection of the public interest. In Indian

law, Article 32 of the Indian constitution contains a tool which directly joints the public with judiciary. A PIL may be introduced in a court of law by the court itself (suo motu), rather than the aggrieved party or another third party. For the exercise of the court's jurisdiction, it is not necessary for the victim of the violation of his or her rights to personally approach the court. In a PIL, the right to file suit is given to a member of the public by the courts through judicial activism. The member of the public may be a non-governmental organization (NGO), an institution or an individual. The Supreme Court of India, rejecting the criticism of judicial activism, has stated that the judiciary has stepped in to give direction because due to executive inaction, the laws enacted by Parliament and the state legislatures for the poor since independence have not been properly implemented.