Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
| Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Full case name | Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr. |
| Citation(s) | (1973) 4 SCC 225 |
| Holding | |
| There are certain principles within the framework of Indian Constitution which are inviolable and hence cannot be amended by the Parliament. These principles were commonly termed as Basic Structure. | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Sikri C. J. Hegde and Mukherjea, JJ.; Shelat and Gover, JJ.; Jaganmohan Reddy, J.; Khanna, J. |
| Dissent | Ray J.; Palekar J.; Mathew J.; Beg J.; Dwivedi J.; Chandrachud J. |
| Laws applied | |
| Constitution of India, Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), Indian Evidence Act, Indian Contract Act 1872 | |
The Kesavananda Bharathi judgement or His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr. (case citation: (1973) 4 SCC 225) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that outlined the Basic Structure doctrine of the Constitution.Justice Hans Raj Khanna asserted through this doctrine that the constitution possesses a basic structure of constitutional principles and values. The Court cemented the prior precedent Golaknath v. State of Punjab AIR 1967 SC 1643, which held that constitutional amendments pursuant to Article 368 were subject to fundamental rights review.
The Basic Structure doctrine forms the basis of power of the Indian judiciary to review, and strike down, amendments to the Constitution of India enacted by the Indian parliament which conflict with or seek to alter this basic structure of the Constitution.
The 13-judge Constitutional bench of the Supreme Court deliberated on the limitations, if any, of the powers of the elected representatives of the people and the nature of fundamental rights of an individual. In a sharply divided verdict, by a margin of 7-6, the court held that while the Parliament has "wide" powers, it did not have the power to destroy or emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the constitution.
Although the court upheld the basic structure doctrine by only the narrowest of margins, it has since gained widespread acceptance and legitimacy due to subsequent cases and judgments. Primary among these was the imposition of the state of emergency by Indira Gandhi in 1975, and the subsequent attempt to suppress her prosecution through the 39th Amendment. When the Kesavananda case was decided, the underlying apprehension of the majority bench that elected representatives could not be trusted to act responsibly was perceived to be unprecedented. However, the passage of the 39th Amendment proved that in fact this apprehension was well-founded. In Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, a Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court used the basic structure doctrine to strike down the 39th amendment and paved the way for restoration of Indian democracy.
...
Wikipedia