Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Advocate Khwaja Siddiqui

Case Analysis : Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

-SIDDIQUI KHWAJA. MOHD NADEEM NAZMA

In the Supreme Court of India

Civil Original Jurisdiction

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 135 of 1970

Swami Keshavananda Bharati                                       …………………Petitioner

Versus

State of Kerala & Others                                              ……………….Respondents

BENCH : S.M. Sikri & A.N. Grover & A.N. Ray & D.G. Palekar & H.R. Khanna & J.M. Shelat & K.K. Mathew & K.S. Hegde & M.H. Beg & P. Jaganmohan Reddy & S.N. Dwivedi & Y.V.Chandrachud

Case Research Analysis :-

• Subject : Constitutional Law & Topic : Doctrine of Basic Structure.

• Date of Judgment : April 24, 1973

• Bench of Judges : 13 – judge bench of the Supreme Court. 

INTRODUCTION

The Doctrine of Basic Structure is a seminal principle in Indian constitutional law, established to safeguard the fundamental essence of the Constitution against amendments that may undermine its core values. This doctrine emerged from the landmark Supreme Court case Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), and has since played a crucial role in maintaining the integrity and continuity of the Indian Constitution. The doctrine ensures that while the Constitution remains a living document, it cannot be altered in ways that compromise its foundational principles.

FACTS

• The Case : Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461

• Petitioner : Swami Keshavananda Bharati, the head of a religious mutt in Kerala.

• Respondent : State of Kerala

• Context : The petitioner challenged the Kerala government’s land reform legislation that imposed restrictions on the management of religious property.

• Judgment Date : April 24, 1973

• Bench : The case was heard by a 13 – judge bench of the Supreme Court.

ISSUES

1. Whether the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution under Article 368 is unlimited.

2. Whether there are inherent limitations on the amending power of Parliament that prevent it from altering the basic structure of the Constitution.

LAW APPLICABLE

Article 368 of the Indian Constitution : Grants Parliament the power to amend the Constitution.

Precedents :

• Sankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951) : Held that the power of amendment under Article 368 includes the power to amend fundamental rights.

• Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967) : Held that Parliament cannot amend fundamental rights.

ANALYSIS : JUDICIAL REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE DOCTRINE

Judicial Review : The power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative acts. The Supreme Court, through the Keshavananda Bharati case, reaffirmed its role in ensuring that constitutional amendments do not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

Evolution : The basic structure doctrine evolved as a middle ground between the positions taken in Sankari Prasad and Golaknath. While it acknowledges the broad amending power of Parliament, it also sets inherent limits to prevent the destruction of the Constitution’s fundamental framework.

THE DOCTRINE OF BASIC STRUCTURE

Principle : The Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its basic structure or essential features.

Basic Structure Elements : Although not exhaustively defined, the following elements have been identified through various judgments :-

Supremacy of the Constitution

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and all laws and actions of the government must conform to it.

Rule of law

The rule of law asserts that every individual and institution, including the government, is accountable to laws that are publicly promulgated, equally enforced, and independently adjudicated. It ensures that no one is above the law and that laws are applied fairly and consistently. This principle is crucial for maintaining order and justice within society.

Principle of separation of powers

This principle divides the responsibilities of the government into three branches: the legislature (makes laws), the executive (implements laws), and the judiciary (interprets laws). This division is intended to prevent the concentration of power in any single branch and to provide a system of checks and balances. Each branch operates independently while maintaining a balance of power.

Objectives specified in the Preamble (justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity)

The Preamble of the Constitution sets out the guiding principles and goals of the nation, including justice (social, economic, and political), liberty (of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship), equality (of status and opportunity), and fraternity (assuring the dignity of the individual and the unity and integrity of the nation). These objectives provide a foundational vision for the Constitution and guide its interpretation and application.

Judicial review

The power of the judiciary to review and, if necessary, invalidate laws and actions of the executive and legislative branches that are inconsistent with the Constitution.

Federalism

A system of government in which entities such as states or provinces share power with a national government.

Secularism

This principle divides the responsibilities of the government into three branches: the legislature (makes laws), the executive (implements laws), and the judiciary (interprets laws). This division is intended to prevent the concentration of power in any single branch and to provide a system of checks and balances. Each branch operates independently while maintaining a balance of power.

Democratic form of government

A democratic government is one in which power is vested in the hands of the people, typically through elected representatives. It ensures that the government is accountable to the people and that citizens have a voice in governance through free and fair elections. This principle underpins the functioning of India as a democratic republic.

Sovereignty and unity of India

The undivided and sovereign status of the nation, emphasizing its territorial integrity and independence from external control.

SUBSEQUENT APPLICATIONS

• Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975): Applied the basic structure doctrine to invalidate parts of the 39th Amendment that sought to place the election of the Prime Minister and Speaker beyond judicial scrutiny.

• Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): Reaffirmed the doctrine by striking down amendments that curtailed judicial review and undermined the balance of fundamental rights and directive principles.

CONCLUSION

The Doctrine of Basic Structure serves as a critical check on the amending powers of Parliament, ensuring that the Constitution’s core values and fundamental framework remain intact. It embodies a balance between the need for constitutional flexibility and the preservation of the Constitution’s essential character. This doctrine has cemented the role of the judiciary as the guardian of the Constitution, maintaining the sanctity and integrity of India’s democratic and constitutional ethos.In essence, the basic structure doctrine not only protects the Constitution from potential overreach by the legislature but also reinforces the principles of justice, equality, and liberty that form the bedrock of the Indian democratic system.