| Court | Supreme Court of India |
|---|---|
| Citation | (1973) 4 SCC 225; AIR 1973 SC 1461 |
| Decided | 24 April 1973 |
| Bench | 13 judges (largest ever), led by Chief Justice S.M. Sikri |
Facts
Swami Kesavananda Bharati, head of the Edneer Mutt in Kerala, challenged Kerala land reform laws that restricted the management of the mutt's property. The case grew into a challenge to the 24th, 25th and 29th Constitutional Amendments, which Parliament had passed to override earlier Supreme Court rulings, especially Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), which had held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights.
Issues
- Is Parliament's power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 unlimited?
- Can Parliament amend Fundamental Rights?
- Were the 24th, 25th and 29th Amendments valid?
Held
By a 7–6 majority, the Court held:
- Parliament can amend any provision of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, which overruled Golaknath on this point.
- But the power to "amend" does not include the power to destroy or alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution.
- The 24th Amendment was upheld. The part of the 25th Amendment that excluded judicial review (the second part of Article 31C) was struck down.
What is the "basic structure"?
The Court did not give an exhaustive list. Different judges identified features including supremacy of the Constitution, the republican and democratic form of government, secularism, separation of powers, federalism, and the dignity and freedom of the individual. Later cases added judicial review, free and fair elections, rule of law and the harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles (Minerva Mills, 1980).
Why it matters
- It is the foundation of constitutional judicial review in India. Courts can strike down even a constitutional amendment if it damages the basic structure.
- It was applied in Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) and I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007), among others.
- It is consistently one of the most-asked cases in CLAT, judiciary and UPSC exams.
Exam one-liner
Parliament may amend any part of the Constitution under Article 368, but not so as to destroy its basic structure. (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973, 13 judges, 7:6)