Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala: Fundamental Right case

Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala: A Landmark Case in Indian Constitutional History

 

The case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala, also known as the Fundamental Rights case, holds a special place in the annals of Indian constitutional jurisprudence. It stands as a watershed moment that profoundly impacted the interpretation and evolution of the Indian Constitution, shaping the course of the nation's legal and political landscape.

 

Background

 

The genesis of the case can be traced back to the turbulent political climate of the 1970s in India. Against the backdrop of social unrest and political upheaval, the government of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi sought to enact sweeping changes to the Indian Constitution through a series of amendments. These proposed amendments, collectively known as the 24th Amendment Act, aimed to curtail the power of the judiciary and consolidate authority in the hands of the executive.

 

The Petitioner: Keshavananda Bharti

 

At the heart of the legal battle stood Swami Keshavananda Bharti, the head of the Edneer Mutt in Kerala. Challenging the constitutional validity of the government's actions, Swami Keshavananda Bharti asserted that the proposed amendments violated the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, thereby undermining its fundamental principles and values. In taking a stand against the government's encroachment on judicial independence, he emerged as a symbol of resistance and a champion of constitutional rights.

 

Key Issues

 

Central to the case was the question of whether there existed any limitations on the amending power of the Indian Parliament. While the Constitution conferred upon Parliament the authority to amend its provisions, the question of whether such amendments could alter the basic structure of the Constitution remained contentious. The crux of the argument revolved around delineating the contours of this "basic structure" and determining whether it served as an inviolable bulwark against arbitrary amendments.

 

Contentions of the Petitioners

 

1. Petitioners contended that the Parliament can’t amend the Constitution in a manner they want as their power to do this is limited. The Parliament cannot make an amendment to the Constitution to change its basic structure as was set forth by Justice Mudholkar in the Sajjan Singh v State of Rajasthan case.
2. They argued that the 24th & 25th Constitutional Amendments were violative of the Fundamental Right provided in Article 19(1)(f).

 

Contentions of the Respondents

 

1. The State said that the Parliament’s supremacy is the Indian legal system’s basic structure and hence, it has boundless power to amend the Constitution. The respondents stressed that in order to fulfil its socio-economic obligations the unlimited power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution must be upheld.

 

Landmark Judgment

 

In a historic decision rendered on April 24, 1973, a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court delivered its verdict in the case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala. In a momentous judgment, the court upheld the doctrine of the basic structure, affirming that while Parliament possessed the power to amend the Constitution, such amendments could not violate its basic structure. This landmark ruling laid down a judicial precedent that continues to exert profound influence on Indian constitutional law to this day.

 

Impact and Legacy

 

The Keshavananda Bharti case marked a significant turning point in Indian constitutional history, heralding a new era of judicial activism and constitutionalism. By safeguarding the basic structure of the Constitution from arbitrary tampering, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its role as the ultimate guardian of constitutional principles and democratic values. The judgment served as a bulwark against executive overreach and entrenched the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.

 

Conclusion

 

The case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala stands as a testament to the resilience of India's democratic institutions and the primacy of the rule of law. Through his unwavering commitment to upholding the sanctity of the Constitution, Swami Keshavananda Bharti became a symbol of courage and integrity, inspiring generations of Indians to defend their constitutional rights. As the nation continues its journey towards a more just and equitable society, the legacy of the Keshavananda Bharti case serves as a guiding light, reminding us of the enduring importance of constitutional principles in safeguarding democracy and justice for all.

 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

 

Q1. What is the Citation of case Keshavananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala?

 

Ans: AIR 1973 SC 1461.

 

Q2. Which case is known as fundamental rights case?

 

Ans: The Kesavananda Bharati case was popularly known as fundamental rights case and also the serious conflict between the Judiciary and the Government.

 

Q2. Which case is popularly known as habeas corpus case?

 

Ans: The verdict in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivakant case, popularly known as the Habeas Corpus case, set the tone for countless arrests under the preventive detention law – a provision whereby defendants could not stake a claim to their liberty under extenuating circumstances.

 

Q3. Can the preamble be amended?

 

 

Ans: It has been clarified by the Supreme Court that being a part of the Constitution, the Preamble can be subjected to Constitutional Amendments exercised under article 368, however, the basic structure cannot be altered. Therefore, it is considered as the heart and soul of the Constitution.

 

Q4. What was the central issue debated in the Keshavananda Bharti case?

 

Ans: The central issue was whether there were any limitations on the amending power of the Indian Parliament. Specifically, the question revolved around whether Parliament could amend the Constitution in a manner that violated its basic structure.

 

Q5. What was the doctrine of the basic structure, and how did it feature in the case?

 

Ans: The doctrine of the basic structure holds that while Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, such amendments cannot alter its basic structure, which comprises fundamental principles and values inherent in the Constitution.

 

Q6. What was the verdict of the Supreme Court in the Keshavananda Bharti case?

 

Ans: In a landmark decision on April 24, 1973, a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld the doctrine of the basic structure, ruling that Parliament's amending power did not extend to altering the basic structure of the Constitution.

 

Q7. What was the significance of the judgment in the Keshavananda Bharti case?

 

Ans: The judgment was significant as it established a precedent that serves as a bulwark against arbitrary amendments to the Constitution. It reaffirmed the role of the judiciary as the guardian of constitutional principles and upheld the principles of separation of powers and judicial independence.

 

Q8. What was the lasting impact and legacy of the Keshavananda Bharti case?

 

Ans: The case had a profound impact on Indian constitutional law, ushering in an era of judicial activism and constitutionalism. It reinforced the supremacy of the Constitution and strengthened democratic institutions by safeguarding fundamental rights and principles from executive overreach.