Introduction & Summary
The Doctrine of Basic Structure is a cornerstone of Indian constitutional jurisprudence, representing a unique judicial innovation that limits the amending power of Parliament. While Article 368 empowers Parliament to amend the Constitution, this landmark doctrine, propounded by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), holds that Parliament cannot alter or destroy the "basic structure" or fundamental features of the Constitution.
This ensures that the core identity and foundational principles of the Constitution remain inviolable, even as it adapts to changing times, thereby safeguarding the supremacy of the Constitution and preventing legislative overreach.
Emergence of the Doctrine
The Basic Structure Doctrine emerged from a prolonged conflict between Parliament's power to amend the Constitution and the judiciary's role as the guardian of Fundamental Rights. Witness the key milestones:
Shankari Prasad Case (1951) & Sajjan Singh Case (1965)
The Supreme Court (SC) initially held that Parliament's power to amend under Article 368 was absolute and extended to amending any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights (FRs). It ruled that 'law' in Article 13(2) (which makes laws violating FRs void) did not include constitutional amendment acts.
Golaknath Case (1967)
The SC reversed its earlier stand, holding that FRs were 'sacrosanct' and 'immutable' and could not be amended by Parliament. It declared that a constitutional amendment was a 'law' under Article 13(2). This created a deadlock between Parliament's will and judicial pronouncement.
24th Constitutional Amendment Act (1971)
To nullify the Golaknath judgment, Parliament passed this amendment. It specifically amended Article 13 and Article 368, explicitly stating that Parliament had the power to amend any part of the Constitution (including FRs) and that a constitutional amendment was not a 'law' under Article 13. It also made President's assent to amendment bills obligatory.
Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973): The Birth of Basic Structure
Date: April 24, 1973. The validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Constitutional Amendments was challenged before a 13-judge bench.
- Upheld validity of 24th Amendment (Parliament can amend FRs).
- Propounded the Doctrine of Basic Structure: Parliament can amend any provision, but cannot alter its "basic structure" or "fundamental features."
- Overruled Golaknath Case.
Source: Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. (AIR 1973 SC 1461)
Elements of the Basic Structure
The Supreme Court has, over time, identified several elements as part of the Basic Structure. This is an evolving and non-exhaustive list, determined on a case-by-case basis.
Supremacy of the Constitution
The Constitution is the supreme law, and all organs of the state derive their power from it.
Sovereign, Democratic, Republican Nature
India's political system must always uphold these foundational principles outlined in the Preamble.
Secular Character
The state's neutrality towards all religions and equal respect for all faiths.
Separation of Powers
Clear demarcation of functions between legislature, executive, and judiciary.
Federal Character
Distribution of power between the Centre and states, while maintaining a strong union.
Unity and Integrity of the Nation
The nation's indivisibility and its commitment to national cohesion.
Judicial Review
The power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
Freedom and Dignity of the Individual
Ensuring fundamental rights and human dignity are inviolable.
Independence of Judiciary
Ensuring the judiciary can function without executive or legislative interference.
Limited Power of Parliament to Amend
Article 368 itself, implying Parliament's power is not absolute.
Welfare State (Socio-Economic Justice)
The constitutional objective of securing justice and welfare for all citizens.
Harmony of FRs & DPSPs
Maintaining a balance between fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy.
Source: M. Laxmikanth; various Supreme Court judgments.
Evolution & Application in Subsequent Cases
The Basic Structure Doctrine has been applied and elaborated in numerous subsequent judgments, demonstrating its practical utility as the ultimate constitutional safeguard.
1975
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain
Context: Challenged validity of 39th Amendment (election disputes beyond court jurisdiction).
Ruling: Struck down Clause 4; held 'free and fair elections' and 'rule of law' as basic features. First direct application of the doctrine.
1980
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India
Context: Challenged sections of 42nd Amendment (primacy of DPSPs over FRs, limited judicial review).
Ruling: Struck down sections; 'harmony & balance between FRs & DPSPs' and 'Judicial Review' are basic features.
1981
Waman Rao & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Context: Challenged laws in the Ninth Schedule enacted after Kesavananda Bharati.
Ruling: Basic Structure Doctrine applies prospectively to constitutional amendments enacted on or after April 24, 1973.
1994
S.R. Bommai & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Context: Dealt with the misuse of Article 356 (President's Rule).
Ruling: 'Federalism', 'secularism', and 'democracy' are basic features. Laid down guidelines for President's Rule.
2007
I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu
Context: Questioned immunity of laws in 9th Schedule after Kesavananda Bharati judgment.
Ruling: Laws placed in 9th Schedule (post-April 24, 1973) are open to challenge if they violate Basic Structure.
2015
Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. UOI (NJAC Case)
Context: Challenged 99th Amendment and NJAC Act (sought to replace collegium system for judicial appointments).
Ruling: Struck down both; 'independence of the judiciary' is a basic feature, violated by executive/legislative influence.
Significance of the Doctrine
- Cemented judiciary's power of judicial review.
- Ensures Parliament cannot subvert the fundamental character of the Constitution.
- Safeguarded foundational values (democracy, secularism, rule of law, FRs).
- Allows adaptation while preserving core identity, making it a living document.
- Upholds the supremacy of the Constitution over legislative power.
Criticism of the Doctrine
- Undermines parliamentary sovereignty by allowing unelected judiciary to veto elected representatives.
- Lacks explicit textual basis in the Constitution; a 'judge-made' doctrine.
- Vague and subjective nature of 'basic structure' leads to unpredictability and uncertainty.
- May act as a hurdle to Parliament's ability to bring about necessary socio-economic reforms.
- Opens the door for judicial overreach, imposing judiciary's interpretation.
Current Debates & Relevance
The Basic Structure Doctrine continues to be highly relevant, forming the bedrock of constitutional discourse in India, particularly in recent landmark judgments.
Summary Table: Evolution of Basic Structure Doctrine
| Case/Act | Year | Key Ruling | Impact on Parliament's Amending Power / Basic Structure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shankari Prasad | 1951 | Parliament can amend FRs. Art 13 'law' doesn't include Amendments. | Parliament has absolute power. |
| Sajjan Singh | 1965 | Reaffirmed Shankari Prasad. | Parliament's power still absolute. |
| Golaknath | 1967 | Parliament CANNOT amend FRs. Amendment IS 'law' under Art 13. | FRs made 'immutable'. |
| 24th Amendment | 1971 | Amended Arts 13 & 368 to nullify Golaknath. | Reasserted Parliament's power to amend any part, including FRs. |
| Kesavananda Bharati | 1973 | Upheld 24th Amend. but propounded Basic Structure Doctrine. | Parliament's power is NOT absolute; cannot alter 'Basic Structure'. This is the origin. |
| Indira Nehru Gandhi | 1975 | Applied Basic Structure. Struck down 39th Amend. Cl 4. | 'Free & fair elections' is Basic Structure. |
| Minerva Mills | 1980 | Struck down parts of 42nd Amend. | 'Judicial review' & 'Harmony of FRs/DPSPs' are Basic Structure. |
| Waman Rao | 1981 | Basic Structure Doctrine applies prospectively (from April 24, 1973). | Clarified applicability to future amendments. |
| S.R. Bommai | 1994 | Federalism, secularism, democracy are Basic Structure. | Reinforced limitations on Art 356. |
| I.R. Coelho | 2007 | Laws in 9th Schedule (post-1973) reviewable for Basic Structure. | Diluted blanket immunity of 9th Schedule. |
| NJAC Case | 2015 | Struck down 99th Amend. & NJAC Act. | 'Independence of Judiciary' is Basic Structure. |
Source: M. Laxmikanth; Supreme Court Judgments.
Test Your Knowledge & Practice
UPSC CSE 2022:
With reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
- No High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain a petition challenging the constitutional validity of any Central law.
- An amendment to the Constitution of India can be initiated by an introduction of a Bill in the Lok Sabha only.
- The Supreme Court of India has held that all the amendments to the Constitution of India made after 24th April 1973 are subject to judicial review.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1 and 3 only
Answer: (c)
Hint: Statement 1 is incorrect (HCs can challenge Central laws unless specific bar). Statement 2 is incorrect (can be introduced in either House). Statement 3 is correct (Waman Rao case extended judicial review for Basic Structure violations to all post-Kesavananda amendments, including those in 9th Schedule - I.R. Coelho).
Original MCQ 1:
Consider the following statements regarding the Basic Structure Doctrine:
- The doctrine was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the Golaknath case (1967).
- It allows Parliament to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, without any limitations.
- The doctrine holds that the 'Independence of the Judiciary' is a basic feature of the Constitution.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 3 only
(c) 1 and 2 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (b)
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect (Kesavananda Bharati case 1973). Statement 2 is incorrect (doctrine explicitly limits amending power). Statement 3 is correct (affirmed in NJAC case 2015).
UPSC CSE 2020 (15 marks):
"Indian Constitution exhibits a unique blend of federalism and unitarism. Elaborate."
Direction: This question provides an excellent opportunity to link the Basic Structure Doctrine to federalism. Discuss how the doctrine protects the 'federal character' as a basic feature (S.R. Bommai case), thus acting as a check against excessive centralisation or unilateral alterations to the federal structure by Parliament.
Original Descriptive Question 1 (15 marks):
"The Doctrine of Basic Structure represents a creative tension between parliamentary sovereignty and judicial review in India's constitutional framework." Discuss the evolution of this doctrine through landmark judicial pronouncements, and critically evaluate its impact on the balance of power among the organs of the state.
Key Points/Structure: Introduction (define B.S., creative tension). Evolution (Shankari Prasad -> Golaknath -> 24th Amend. -> Kesavananda Bharati). Application (Indira Gandhi, Minerva Mills, NJAC, S.R. Bommai). Impact on Balance of Power (limits Parliament, strengthens Judiciary, constitutional supremacy). Debate (criticisms vs. safeguard). Conclusion.