Revisiting Kesavananda Bharati: The Cornerstone of Constitutional Amendments

The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case is arguably the most significant constitutional case in Indian legal history. It laid down the Basic Structure Doctrine, establishing that although the Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its essential features. This doctrine serves as a powerful check on arbitrary amendments that could undermine democratic principles.

The case arose when Swami Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a religious sect in Kerala, challenged the Kerala government's attempts to impose restrictions on the management of his religious property under land reform legislation. While the initial issue appeared to concern property rights, the case evolved into a much larger constitutional question: To what extent can Parliament amend the Constitution?

In a narrow 7-6 majority, the Supreme Court ruled that certain fundamental aspects of the Constitution, like the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, separation of powers, and judicial review, constitute its basic structure and are therefore beyond the reach of parliamentary amendment. The verdict ensured that India would remain a constitutional democracy in both letter and spirit.

This judgement holds a central place in Indian constitutional jurisprudence. At Mullick & Co., we emphasise the relevance of this doctrine in modern legislative and judicial debates, especially when laws or amendments are challenged as being unconstitutional.