Previous Year Question

The Supreme Court propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine in the case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).

The historic judgment was delivered on 24 April 1973 by a 13-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court with a majority of 7:6.

Meaning of the Basic Structure Doctrine

Article 368 empowers Parliament to amend the Constitution. However, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court held that Parliament cannot exercise its amending power to destroy or damage the basic structure of the Constitution.

This means that constitutional provisions can be amended, but the fundamental identity of the Constitution cannot be eliminated through constitutional amendments.

Major elements of the Basic Structure

In various judgments, the Supreme Court has recognised principles such as the supremacy of the Constitution, judicial review, independence of the judiciary, federalism and separation of powers as elements associated with the Basic Structure.

The Constitution does not provide a fixed and exhaustive list of all the elements of its Basic Structure. The doctrine has developed through judicial interpretation.

Difference from the Golaknath Case

In Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), the Supreme Court restricted Parliament's amending power by prohibiting amendments to Fundamental Rights.

However, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Court clarified that Parliament could amend constitutional provisions, including Fundamental Rights, provided that such amendments did not damage the Basic Structure of the Constitution.

Thus, the Golaknath case concerned limitations on the constitutional amending power, whereas the formulation of the Basic Structure Doctrine is attributed to the Kesavananda Bharati case.