Analysis of Keshavananda Bharti vs union of India case

 Here's a blog on the Kesavananda Bharati case which is a landmark case which came with major amendment and it was first time when doctrine of basic structure was questioned in the case.  

The Landmark That Shaped Indian Constitutional Law: Kesavananda Bharati Case

In the history of Indian constitutional law, there have been few cases that have left as deep and lasting an imprint as the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This seminal Supreme Court ruling not only changed the trajectory of constitutional law in India but also strengthened the bedrock of Indian democracy.

Background of the Case

The narrative starts in the late 1960s, a time of far-reaching social and economic changes in India. The central government and the state governments were enacting land reform legislation with the aim of redistributing land to alleviate inequality. But most of these acts were challenged legally on the ground of infringing fundamental rights, specifically the right to property.

Kesavananda Bharati, the leader of a religious mutt (monastery) in Kerala, contested the Kerala government's move to put curbs on the administration of the Mutt's property through the Kerala Land Reforms Act. His case transcended a personal complaint—it provided an opening for a fundamental question: Can Parliament alter any portion of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights?

The Legal Dilemma

Before this case, Parliament had enacted a number of constitutional amendments (particularly the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments) which tried to overrule the Supreme Court's previous judgments. These amendments asserted Parliament possessed absolute authority to modify the Constitution under Article 368, regardless of whether such amendments touched Fundamental Rights.

This posed a very serious legal problem: Was there any restraint on the power of Parliament to alter the Constitution?

The Verdict

The largest bench in the history of Indian courts, 13 judges strong, decided the case. The bench was so divided that finally, the ruling was delivered by a mere 7-6 majority.

It was held that Parliament may reform any aspect of the Constitution including Fundamental Rights, but not the "basic structure" of the Constitution. Thus, this emerged as the Basic Structure Doctrine.

What Is the Basic Structure Doctrine?

The court never clearly defined "basic structure," but it enumerated certain aspects such as:

Supremacy of the Constitution

Rule of law

Separation of powers

Judicial review

Fundamental rights

Parliamentary democracy

Secularism and federalism

In the course of time, the judiciary has construed and developed this doctrine in several judgements.

Importance and Legacy

Kesavananda Bharati case turned a new page in Indian jurisprudence:

1. It maintained the essence of the Constitution by guaranteeing that no power, even Parliament, could dismantle its fundamental principles.

2. It maintained judicial review as a bulwark against authoritarianism and unbridled legislative power.

3. It maintained constitutional flexibility while ensuring stability, providing adaptability without sacrificing fundamental values.

Conclusion

Well over half a century since it was given, the Kesavananda Bharati decision continues to ring in the life of Indian democracy. It remains an exemplar of constitutional brakes, a reassurance that under democracy, authority should never forget its obligation of restraint and adherence to root norms.

With ongoing developments in India, the Doctrine of Basic Structure is a shining beacon—a unspoken guardian standing sentinel over the essence of the Constitution.