1. Introduction
- Case Title: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
- Date of Judgement: April 24, 1973
- Bench: Constitutional Bench of 13 Judges
- Significance: This judgement established the “Basic Structure Doctrine”
2. Background
- Context:
- Keshavananda Bharati, the newly appointed head of Edneer Mutt challenged the Land reforms introduced by Indira Gandhi Government.
- The case raised questions over Parliament’s Power to amend the constitution, which is mentioned under Article 268.
- Key Issue: Can Parliament amend any part of the Constitution, including fundamental rights?
3. Key Constitutional Provisions
- Article 368: Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution.
- Fundamental Rights (Part III): Rights guaranteed to citizens.
- Article 13: Laws inconsistent with fundamental rights shall be void.
4. Main Issues for Consideration
- Parliament’s power to amend any part of constitution
- Parliament power to amend Fundamental Rights.
- Power to Parliament to make changes in features of the constitution.
5. Judgement Summary
- Verdict:
- Under Article 368, Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution are wide but it is not absolute.
- 7:6 Majority: Parliament cannot alter the “basic structure” or yessential features of the Constitution.
- “Basic Structure Doctrine”: While Parliament can amend most parts of the Constitution, certain key principles and structures cannot be altered.
6. Components of the Basic Structure
- Supremacy of the Constitution
- Republic and democratic form of government
- Secularism
- Separation of powers 3 wings of the democracy between the legislature, executive, and judiciary
- Federalism
- Judicial review
- Free and fair elections
7. Impact on Constitutional Law
- Limited Parliament’s amending power: Established that constitutional amendments cannot destroy or damage its basic structure.
- Judicial Review Strengthened: Supreme Court retained the power to review constitutional amendments.
- Fundamental Rights Protection: Prevented Parliament from abridging or taking away fundamental rights arbitrarily.
8. Landmark Legacy
- Doctrine Evolution: Over the years, the Supreme Court expanded and defined the “basic structure” doctrine in subsequent rulings.
- Post-1973 Judgments:
- Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): Laws related to election and its misuse.Then Prime Minister’s position were struck down for violating the basic structure.
- Minerva Mills Case (1980): Again the Supreme Court of India reaffirmed the basic structure doctrine by this case the.
- Power to amend the constitution mentioned under Article 368 is not absolute.
9. Significance
- Key focus on Article 368 and Basic Structure Doctrine its evolution and implication on parliamentary sovereignty.
- Know the elements of the basic structure and key cases (like Minerva Mills).
- Identify important constitutional provisions related to basic structure doctrine.
- Balance between amendability of the Constitution and judicial oversight.
- Link the case with subsequent amendments and their constitutional validity (e.g., 42nd Amendment).
10. Why Does It Matters?
- Defining Constitutional Limits:
- This landmark judgement not only plays a crucial role in determining the power of parliament to amend any part of the constitution but also to ensure the core values of the constitution must be intact.
- Foundation for Judicial Review:
- Judiciary is considered as the Guardian of the Constitution and its Fundamental Principles which should be preserved, the case solidifies this aspect as well.
Source- Supreme Court of India (Digital Supreme Court Reports)
Also Read- KESAVANANDA BHARATI CASE
