The Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India (UOI) case is a landmark judgment in Indian constitutional law, which was delivered by the Supreme Court of India on April 24, 1973. This case is significant because it established the doctrine of the “Basic Structure” of the Indian Constitution, which limits the amending power of the Indian Parliament.
Background of The Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India (UOI) :
The case originated from a challenge to the 24th Amendment Act of 1971, which sought to amend Article 13(2) of the Indian Constitution. Article 13(2) stated that the state shall not make any law that takes away or abridges the fundamental rights of citizens. The 24th Amendment Act aimed to exclude any constitutional amendment from being challenged on the grounds that it violated fundamental rights.
Key Issues:
The primary issue before the Supreme Court was whether there were any limitations on the amending power of the Parliament, especially concerning fundamental rights.
Relevant Provisions:
- Article 13(2): “The State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges the rights conferred by this Part and any law made in contravention of this clause shall, to the extent of the contravention, be void.”
- Article 368: This article deals with the power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution. Before the Keshavananda Bharati case, it was believed that the Parliament had unlimited power to amend the Constitution under Article 368.
Court’s Decision: in Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India (UOI)
In a historic and closely divided judgment (7-6 majority), the Supreme Court held that while the Parliament had the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, this power was not absolute. The Court ruled that there was a “Basic Structure” of the Constitution that could not be altered by amendments.
The Court did not explicitly define the Basic Structure but listed certain principles that formed a part of it, including:
- The supremacy of the Constitution.
- The republican and democratic form of government.
- Secularism.
- Separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary.
- Federal character of the Constitution.
- The dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation.
Impact of The Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India (UOI)
The Keshavananda Bharati case established the principle that while the Indian Parliament had wide-ranging powers to amend the Constitution, it could not alter its Basic Structure. This decision laid down a significant limitation on the amending power of the Parliament and protected the core principles of the Indian Constitution.
It is important to note that this judgment did not provide an exhaustive list of what constitutes the Basic Structure, leaving it open for interpretation in subsequent cases. This landmark decision has had a profound and lasting impact on Indian constitutional law and jurisprudence.
vs Union of India (UOI)
Significance:
- Limited Parliamentary Power: The Keshavananda Bharati case effectively limited the power of the Indian Parliament to amend the Constitution. While the Parliament could still amend various provisions, it couldn’t alter the fundamental framework or the “Basic Structure” of the Constitution.
- Protecting Fundamental Rights: The judgment reinforced the importance of fundamental rights and their protection as a core element of the Basic Structure. It ensured that the government couldn’t use its amending power to infringe upon or dilute these rights.
- Judicial Review: The case established the supremacy of the judiciary in determining the validity of constitutional amendments. It affirmed the authority of the Supreme Court to review and strike down any amendment that violated the Basic Structure.
- Flexible Yet Rigid Constitution: India’s Constitution is often described as “flexible” because it can be amended relatively easily compared to some other constitutions. However, the Keshavananda Bharati case introduced a degree of rigidity by protecting the Basic Structure. This balance between flexibility and rigidity is a unique feature of the Indian Constitution.
Subsequent Developments:
After the Keshavananda Bharati case, several other landmark judgments clarified and expanded upon the concept of the Basic Structure. Some notable developments include:
- Minerva Mills Case (1980): In this case, the Supreme Court held that the amending power of Parliament couldn’t be used to alter the Basic Structure or destroy the essential features of the Constitution.
- Waman Rao Case (1981): The Court ruled that judicial review extended to constitutional amendments, and if an amendment violated the Basic Structure, it could be declared void.
- Indira Gandhi’s Election Case (1975): The Court struck down amendments made during the state of emergency as they were seen as undermining the democratic and federal features of the Constitution, which were part of the Basic Structure.
- Post-Emergency Amendments: In subsequent years, some amendments were struck down for violating the Basic Structure, such as those related to anti-defection laws and reservation policies.
Ongoing Significance:
The doctrine of the Basic Structure continues to play a pivotal role in Indian constitutional law. It acts as a safeguard against any potential misuse of power by the government and ensures the enduring relevance and sanctity of the Indian Constitution. Any constitutional amendment passed by Parliament is subject to judicial scrutiny, and if it is found to violate the Basic Structure, it can be declared unconstitutional.
Overall, the Keshavananda Bharati case has left an indelible mark on Indian jurisprudence and serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s role in upholding the principles and values enshrined in the Constitution.
In conclusion of Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India case
the Keshavananda Bharati vs. Union of India case is a landmark judgment in Indian constitutional law that has had a profound and enduring impact on the Indian legal system and the interpretation of the Indian Constitution. The key takeaways and conclusions from this case are:
- Limitation on Parliamentary Power: The case established the doctrine of the Basic Structure, which places limits on the power of the Indian Parliament to amend the Constitution. While the Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its Basic Structure, ensuring the preservation of fundamental principles.
- Protection of Fundamental Rights: The judgment reinforced the importance of protecting fundamental rights as a part of the Basic Structure. It prevents the government from using its amending power to infringe upon or dilute these rights.
- Judicial Supremacy: The case emphasized the supremacy of the judiciary in determining the validity of constitutional amendments. It affirmed the authority of the Supreme Court to review and strike down any amendment that violated the Basic Structure.
- Balance of Flexibility and Rigidity: The Indian Constitution is both flexible and rigid. It can be amended relatively easily, but the Basic Structure doctrine introduces a degree of rigidity by safeguarding core constitutional principles.
- Subsequent Developments: Several subsequent judgments and legal developments have clarified and expanded upon the concept of the Basic Structure, further reinforcing its significance in Indian constitutional law.
- Ongoing Relevance: The doctrine of the Basic Structure continues to be a cornerstone of Indian jurisprudence, ensuring that the principles and values enshrined in the Indian Constitution remain protected and relevant.
Overall, the Keshavananda Bharati case underscores the importance of upholding the core values and principles of the Indian Constitution and ensures that the government’s amending power is subject to checks and balances to prevent any potential misuse.
Visits
Ask Akash – Case Summary, Knowledge, Rights
Last minute revision :- Indian Penal Code summary 2023 : topper tips to become ranker – Ask Akash
Important Landmark Cases : Indian Constitution 2023 – Ask Akash
ask akash (@asklegalakash) / X (twitter.com)
