Basic Structure Doctrine•2 min read•[1973] Supp SCR 1 : (1973) 4 SCC 225

His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru v. State of Kerala and Another

Bench: 13-Judge Constitution Bench (S.M. Sikri, C.J., J.M. Shelat, K.S. Hegde, A.N. Grover, A.N. Ray, P.J. Reddy, D.G. Palekar, H.R. Khanna, K.K. Mathew, M.H. Beg, S.N. Dwivedi, A.K. Mukherjea & Y.V. Chandrachud, JJ.)
Constitutional & Constitution Bench Matters
Read the full judgment on Indian Kanoon
Core Legal Ratio Decidendi

"Parliament's amending power under Article 368 is limited; it cannot abrogate, emasculate, or alter the Basic Structure and fundamental framework of the Constitution of India."

I
Step 1

Issues Before the Court

  1. (i)

    Whether the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution under Article 368 is unlimited, absolute, and plenary, extending even to the abrogation of fundamental rights?

  2. (ii)

    Can Parliament through constitutional amendments alter or destroy the core democratic, republican, and federal identity of the Constitution of India?

R
Step 2

Law & Rules Applicable

  1. (i)

    Constitution of India, Article 368 (Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor).

  2. (ii)

    24th, 25th, and 29th Constitutional Amendments.

  3. (iii)

    Constitution of India, Article 13(2), Article 14, 19, 31.

  4. (iv)

    I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (overruled in part).

A
Step 3

Application to Facts & Circumstances

The head of Edneer Mutt in Kerala challenged the Kerala Land Reforms Act under Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) and challenged the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments which sought to place amendments outside judicial review.

The Union argued that Parliament possessed unlimited constituent sovereign power under Article 368 to amend any part of the Constitution, including rewriting its preamble or abolishing elections.

By a razor-thin 7:6 majority, the Supreme Court ruled that while Parliament can amend any provision of the Constitution (including fundamental rights), the word 'amend' does not include the power to destroy the foundation.

Justice H.R. Khanna provided the pivotal deciding vote: Parliament cannot alter the 'Basic Structure' or framework of the Constitution. Illustrative pillars of the basic structure include: Supremacy of the Constitution, Rule of Law, Separation of Powers, Judicial Review, Federalism, Secularism, and Free & Fair Elections.

C
Step 4

Conclusion & Ruling

  1. (i)

    Article 368 confers wide amending power, but this power is inherently limited and cannot be used to destroy the Basic Structure.

  2. (ii)

    The second part of Article 31-C (which ousted judicial review) was struck down as unconstitutional.

  3. (iii)

    Judicial review is a permanent pillar of the Indian constitutional matrix.

Authorities Cited

Full texts open on Indian Kanoon in a new tab.

  1. I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, [1967] 2 SCR 762Full text of I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab on Indian Kanoon
← All case law briefs