In the Kesavananda Bharati case, the struggle between the legislative and the judiciary resulted in the “fundamental structure” theory. Talk about it. What impact does the case have on Parliament’s ability to modify the Constitution? (Answer in 250 words)
The Preamble of the Indian Constitution encapsulates its core ideals: sovereignty, socialism, secularism, democracy, republicanism, and the principles of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. These ideals guide the entire document and influence constitutional interpretation. Key Judicial InterRead more
The Preamble of the Indian Constitution encapsulates its core ideals: sovereignty, socialism, secularism, democracy, republicanism, and the principles of justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity. These ideals guide the entire document and influence constitutional interpretation.
Key Judicial Interpretations:
- Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973): Declared the Preamble as part of the Constitution, establishing that its basic structure cannot be altered.
- S.R. Bommai Case (1994): Emphasized secularism and federalism as fundamental principles.
- Minerva Mills Case (1980): Highlighted the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles, protecting the Constitution’s basic structure.
These cases reinforced the inviolability of the Preamble’s principles, preventing arbitrary amendments, and ensuring justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity in governance. The Preamble’s interpretation has guided the judiciary in preserving the democratic, secular, and socialist fabric of the nation, shaping India’s constitutional jurisprudence.
See less
All democratic countries are governed by a Constitution. In the 1967 Golaknath case, India's Supreme Court ruled that Parliament couldn't amend fundamental rights. Adolf Hitler's transformation of Germany's Weimar Constitution from democratic to dictatorial is a notable example of altering a constitRead more
All democratic countries are governed by a Constitution. In the 1967 Golaknath case, India’s Supreme Court ruled that Parliament couldn’t amend fundamental rights. Adolf Hitler’s transformation of Germany’s Weimar Constitution from democratic to dictatorial is a notable example of altering a constitution.
In 1972, the Keshavananda Bharati case settled the debate on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution. Keshavananda Bharati, chief priest at Sri Edneer Mutt in Kerala, challenged the Kerala Land Reforms Act of 1963, claiming it violated Article 26 on religious freedom. This case allowed the Supreme Court to define Parliament’s amendment authority.
The Court’s ruling affirmed the Constitution’s supremacy and established the “basic structure doctrine,” which prevents amendments that alter the fundamental framework of the Constitution. This doctrine was later applied in the Minerva Mills and Waman Rao cases. The 24th and 25th Amendments of 1971 aimed to nullify the Golaknath judgment.
The Keshavananda Bharati case, concluded in March 1973 by a 13-judge bench, resulted in a 7:6 decision, with Justice H.R. Khanna as the tiebreaker. Although Bharati lost, the basic structure doctrine was established. Justice A.N. Ray, who dissented, later became Chief Justice of India.
The Keshavananda Bharati case was crucial in shaping Indian constitutional law, ensuring protection against potential authoritarianism.
See less