Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain Case – Kashish Gill

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain Case

• [1975] 2 SCC 159

• Date of Judgment: 7th November 1975
• Court: Supreme Court of India
• Case Type: Civil Appeal No. 887 of 1975

INTRODUCTION

In the history of Indian Legal system, Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain was a landmark judgement. In the history of Independent India, it was the first time when elections of the President were set aside. It was also the first time when the Kesavananda Bharti case was applied to struck down the constitutional amendment. Indian legal system also faced the situation where election laws were amended to legitimize the nullified elections of the Prime Minister.

FACTS

 Election Allegations: Raj Narain filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging Indira Gandhi’s election victory. He accused her of electoral malpractices, including the use of government machinery for campaign purposes.

 Allahabad High Court Verdict: In June 1975, Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court ruled in Favor of Raj Narain. The court found Indira Gandhi guilty of corrupt electoral practices and declared her election from Rae Bareli invalid. The court also disqualified her from holding any elected office for six years.

 Impact of the Verdict: The Allahabad High Court’s decision had immediate repercussions. It put Indira Gandhi’s position as Prime Minister in jeopardy and created a political crisis in the country.

 Declaration of Emergency: In response to the court’s ruling, Indira Gandhi’s government declared a state of Emergency on June 25, 1975, citing internal unrest and threat to national security. During the Emergency, civil liberties were suspended, opposition leaders were arrested, and press censorship was imposed.

 Supreme Court Appeal: Indira Gandhi appealed against the Allahabad High Court verdict to the Supreme Court of India. In 1977, the Supreme Court upheld the finding that Indira Gandhi’s election was invalid due to electoral malpractices. However, the court modified the punishment, allowing her to retain her seat in Parliament but she was barred from participating in its proceedings until she was re-elected.

 Political and Legal Significance: The case underscored the importance of electoral integrity and the judiciary’s role in upholding democratic norms. It also raised questions about the balance of power between the executive and judiciary branches of government in India.

ISSUES

The issues raised in Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Raj Narain were:

• Whether Article 329A clause (4) of the Constitution of India is valid?

However, the validity of Article 329A Clause (4) was itself challenged in this case. The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment delivered on June 24, 1975, considered the constitutionality of this clause. The court upheld the clause and emphasized that Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, including provisions relating to elections. The court reasoned that the intention behind Article 329A was to protect the sanctity of elections and to ensure that challenges to electoral outcomes are decided by a specialized forum (Election Tribunals) rather than through regular judicial process.

• Whether Representation of People’s (Amendment) Act, 1974 and Election:

The Representation of People’s (Amendment) Act, 1974 was pivotal in the Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain case as it retrospectively validated her election, overturning the Allahabad High Court’s decision. The Supreme Court’s validation of this amendment underscored Parliament’s authority to legislate on electoral matters, shaping subsequent legal and constitutional developments in India.

• Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 are constitutionally valid?

The Supreme Court delivered its judgment on August 5, 1975. The Court upheld the validity of the Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975. It emphasized that Parliament has the legislative competence to amend laws, including electoral laws, and that such amendments can be made retrospectively if Parliament deems it necessary to rectify perceived injustices or to protect public interest.

• Whether Indira Gandhi’s election is valid or void?

While the appeal was pending, the Indian Parliament passed the Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975. This Act retrospectively amended the Representation of People Act, 1951 to nullify the grounds on which the High Court had declared Indira Gandhi’s election void.

Laws

The constitutional bench gave its decision on 7th November 1975. The apex court upheld the contention of Raj Narain and declared the impugned clause 4 of Article 329A unconstitutional.

In the words of Mathew J. Article 329A (4) destroyed the basic structure of the Constitution viz. the resolution of an election dispute by ascertaining the adjudicative facts and applying the relevant laws. He was of the opinion- “a healthy democracy can only function when there is the possibility of free and fair elections, The impugned amendment destroyed that possibility and therefore violated the basic structure of the Constitution”.

Chandrachud J. found that “The 39th amendment is violative of the principle of separation of power as it intently transferred a purely judicial function into the hands of the legislature. Further, he was certain that the said amendment is also violative of Article 14 as it created inequality for certain members against others”.

Ray C.J. found another basic feature violated by the said amendment i.e. rule of law whereas Justice Khanna found that “The violation of norms of free and fair elections. The bench also found the said amendment violated the principles of natural justice i.e. audi altrem partem since it denies the right of fair hearing to the one who is challenging the election of the members mentioned under the amendment. Democracy is a basic feature of the Indian Constitution. Parliament does not have the power to pass a retrospective law validating an invalid election. This exercise is nothing but an example of despotic use of unrestrained and unfettered power”.

Therefore, due to various reasons, the court struck down the 39th (Amendment) Act, 1975 as it was unconstitutional and violated the basic structure of the Constitution. And the Supreme Court set aside Allahabad High Court’s judgment, it freed Indira Gandhi from all the corruption charges and acquitted her, thereby making her election valid.

ANALYSIS

This Case is a landmark case because the Supreme Court reminded the Parliament that the Law will always uphold the Constitution. Th

above all and Judiciary is there to save democracy from harmful actions of Parliament. The Court in this landmark case sustained the principle of Separation of Powers which shape check and balance between the Pillars so as to avoid encroachment and violation. The Case upheld that Indira Gandhi, just to save herself from Allahabad High Court decision, she passed the 39th Amendment and imposed the Emergency. However, Judiciary resolved this crisis by withdrawing the Amendment passed and helding the Elections valid.

The Court in this case highlighted the Essence of Democracy i.e. Free and Fair elections. The Supreme Court held that the country where the Citizens can’t elect their representatives through free and fair election is not an essence of democracy. The Court proved that Parliament is by law and law is not by parliament. The Court however focused on parliament or Indira Gandhis vicious amendment and made Rule of Law dominant.

According to the Facts found in this case, Prime Minister misused her power when she was found guilty violating election laws. In this situation she should have resigned with the left dignity but she imposed emergency to save herself. However, Judiciary handled the situation and pulled back the 39th Constitutional Amendment which is violative of basic structure.

The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 played an effective role which made the Challenge of Amendments in court of law impossible (However this Amendment was struck down in Minerva Mills5). The Parliament in its agony passed a law on Judiciary where the Court lost the power to question and amendment of Constitution.

CONCLUSION

The Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain case involved allegations of election malpractice against Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in the 1971 Lok Sabha elections. Raj Narain contested the election’s validity, claiming that Gandhi exceeded campaign expenditure limits and that a government officer, Yashpal Kapur, improperly assisted her. 

The Supreme Court in Indira Gandhi v Raj Narain found no conclusive evidence of wrongdoing by Gandhi, ruling her election valid. It determined that personal election expenses should not be counted as party expenses. Moreover, Yashpal Kapur’s resignation prior to assisting Gandhi was deemed acceptable. The court also found no substantial proof of his endorsing speeches. Consequently, the Allahabad High Court’s order to bar Gandhi from elections and resign as Prime Minister was overturned.

References used
Websites:

Report on �Case Summary: Indira Gandhi vs Raj Narain and Anr.’ By AnushreeTadge https://lawlex.org/lex-bulletin/case-summary-indira-gandhi-vs-raj-narain-and-anr/18868

Report on �The Case That Led to Emergency: Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)’ by Saumya Saxena.

Report on �Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs. Raj Narain � Case Summary’ by Hemant Varshney http://lawtimesjournal.in/indira-nehru-gandhi-v-raj-narain/