Jul 25, 2025
20
mins read
The Kesavananda Bharati case is widely regarded as the most important landmark case in Indian constitutional history. This case fundamentally reshaped constitutional law in India by introducing the basic structure doctrine, a principle that restricts the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution beyond a certain limit. The Supreme Court of India in this landmark judgment clarified that while Parliament has wide amending powers, it cannot damage or destroy the constitution's basic structure. This doctrine has since served as a vital check on arbitrary constitutional amendments, preserving the features of the Constitution and ensuring the judicial independence of the apex court.
The Kesavananda Bharati case arose from a constitutional challenge to land reform laws in Kerala. The Kerala Land Reforms Act of 1963, along with its 1969 and 1971 amendments, enabled the compulsory acquisition of land, including that held by religious institutions.
Kesavananda Bharati, head of the Edneer Mutt, filed a petition under Article 32 on March 21, 1970, asserting violations of Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25, and 26-especially the right to manage religious affairs and property.
During the case, Parliament passed the 24th, 25th, and 29th Constitutional Amendments to assert its power under Article 368, effectively challenging earlier judgments like the Golaknath case. Thus, the case escalated from a property dispute to a debate on the parliament’s amending power and constitutional validity.
Table of content
The case was heard by a 13-judge Constitution Bench-the largest in Indian history-from October 1972 to March 1973. The Supreme Court delivered its judgment on April 24, 1973, with a narrow 7:6 majority. It ruled that while Parliament could amend any part of the Constitution, it could not alter its basic structure.
Arguments of the Petitioner
Represented by Nani Palkhivala, Fali Nariman, and Soli Sorabjee, the petitioner argued:
Fundamental Rights Violated: The 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments infringed on rights like equality, religious freedom, and property rights.
Amending Power Limited: Parliament’s power is not absolute and cannot alter the structure of the Constitution.
Judicial Review Undermined: Curtailing this violated the constitution’s basic structure.
Right to Property: The Right to Property is a fundamental right that cannot be taken away without due process.
Arguments of the Respondents
The State of Kerala and Union of India countered:
Unlimited Amending Power: Parliament has full authority under Article 368.
Socio-Economic Justice: The laws promoted directive principles and land redistribution.
Property Rights Not Absolute: Regulating them was vital for public welfare.
In a 7:6 majority, the Supreme Court upheld the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments, confirming Parliament’s power to amend. However, it emphasized that this power does not extend to altering the constitution’s basic structure.The Court defined basic structure to include principles like:
Supremacy of the Constitution
Democratic and republican government
Secularism
Separation of powers
Federalism
Judicial review
Long-Term Impact
Judicial Review Strengthened: Courts gained the authority to invalidate amendments violating the basic structure doctrine.
Fundamental Rights Protected: Liberty, equality, and religious freedom became constitutionally safeguarded.
Check on Majoritarianism: Parliament could no longer unilaterally override essential constitutional values.
Guided Future Rulings: Reaffirmed in Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) and Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980).
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment remains a cornerstone of Indian constitutional law, balancing constitutional continuity with the need for democratic reform. It preserved the structure of the Constitution and protected its fundamental features, ensuring that no authority could rewrite the essence of India’s democracy.
The basic structure doctrine holds that certain core principles of the Constitution cannot be amended or abrogated by Parliament. Kesavananda Bharati firmly established this rule: the Court declared that fundamental features like democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law are inviolable. As Justice Sikri famously noted, Parliament cannot “destroy or emasculate” the Constitution’s basic framework.
Key elements of the basic structure (as recognized in this case and later decisions) include:
Democratic Republic – The Constitution’s sovereignty of the people and republican form of government.
Secularism – Equal treatment of all religions by the state.
Federalism – Division of powers between the Union and States.
Rule of Law & Judicial Review – All laws and amendments must conform to constitutional principles, and courts have the power to invalidate any change that violates the basic structure.
Fundamental Rights – The protections in Part III (e.g. equality, freedom of religion) are part of the basic structure. Parliament may amend these rights only to the extent that the “basic foundation” of the Constitution remains intact.
Directive Principles Balance – Parts III (rights) and IV (DPSPs) must be balanced and harmonized; this harmony itself is a basic element.
Preamble Values – Core ideals such as Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity (from the Preamble) underpin the Constitution’s identity and cannot be removed.
To understand in depth about Basic Structure Doctrine check our blog :
Basic Structure Doctrine: Evolution, Meaning, Supreme Court Cases & Significance - PadhAI
“Every provision of the Indian Constitution can be amended, provided the basic foundation and structure of the Constitution remains the same,” the Court said. This means amendments are valid only if they respect the Constitution’s essential features.
Kesavananda Bharati judgment reaffirmed the importance of judicial review in India. The Court explicitly held that judicial review itself is an essential feature of the Constitution and cannot be taken away. This means the Supreme Court has the authority to examine and strike down any constitutional amendment that violates the basic structure. In later cases (for example, Minerva Mills in 1980), the Court relied on Kesavananda’s doctrine to invalidate parts of the 42nd Amendment that tried to curtail judicial review. In this way, Kesavananda cemented the judiciary’s role as a check on Parliament’s amending power.
The Supreme Court held that it has the power to review constitutional amendments to ensure they don’t violate the basic structure. This underscores the independence and authority of the Indian judiciary. Read a comprehensive guide on the structure, role, and challenges of the Indian Judiciary here: Indian Judiciary Structure, Independence, Role, Reforms & Challenges
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment directly challenged three key amendments: the 24th, 25th, and 29th. These were enacted to protect land reform laws from judicial interference. The Court’s analysis was as follows:
24th Amendment (1971): Affirmed Parliament’s power to amend any part of the Constitution (including fundamental rights). The Supreme Court upheld that clause – confirming Parliament could amend rights – but it insisted that any such amendment must preserve the Constitution’s basic structure.
25th Amendment (1971): Gave retrospective effect to land acquisition laws (including restrictions on property). The Court upheld the land reform objectives but struck down any provision that would negate fundamental features of the Constitution. It emphasized that reasonable limits on property rights were allowed for social welfare, but Parliament could not abrogate fundamental rights entirely.
29th Amendment (1972): Extended Parliament’s power to amend Article 368 itself. The Court held that even this could not override the basic structure. Any amendment (even one passed under the 29th) that destroyed the Constitution’s core would be void.
In essence, the Supreme Court preserved Parliament’s broad amending power (upholding the 24th Amendment’s principle) but placed a clear limit: amendments that alter the basic structure – including mutually balancing Fundamental Rights and DPSPs – are unconstitutional. Learn more by clicking on this link: Sessions of Parliament in India, Constitutional Provisions, Types, Adjournment, Prorogation & Lapsing of Bills - PadhAI
Fundamental rights figured prominently in Kesavananda Bharati. The petitioner argued that amendments were violating his rights (e.g. to property and religious freedom). The Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights are an essential part of the Constitution’s basic structure and cannot be wholly abrogated. As Justice Sikri stated, rights in Part III can only be “reasonably abridged” in the public interest, not abolished.
Key Point: Fundamental rights (like equality, freedom of religion, property) must be protected. Parliament may amend them, but only without destroying the Constitution’s fundamental identity.
For example, the Court clarified that while social welfare measures (such as the land reforms) could limit the right to property, there was no unlimited “protective shield” around property. The reforms were valid, but the Court removed any notion that property rights were absolute. In short, Kesavananda Bharati confirmed that fundamental rights themselves are part of the basic structure that Parliament cannot violate.
The case also addressed Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). The Court held that the DPSPs (Part IV) must be implemented in harmony with Fundamental Rights (Part III). Justices Shelat and Grover observed that Parts III and IV form a basic element of the Constitution: their harmony cannot be altered. In other words, the state cannot use DPSPs as a cover to destroy basic rights. Kesavananda Bharati thus guided that amendments giving absolute priority to the DPSPs (while negating fundamental rights) would breach the Constitution’s basic structure. This set the tone for later cases balancing social welfare objectives with core rights.
Introduction of Basic Structure Doctrine
The Supreme Court held that while Parliament can amend the Indian Constitution under Article 368, it cannot alter its basic structure-including democracy, rule of law, separation of powers, federalism, secularism, judicial independence, and fundamental rights-establishing an inviolable constitutional core.Limitation on Parliamentary Powers
The judgment imposed substantive limits: amendments cannot destroy the Constitution’s foundational framework, effectively curbing absolute legislative authority.Reinforcement of Judicial Review
The Doctrine affirmed judicial review over constitutional amendments; any amendment infringing the basic structure is unconstitutional.Balancing Reform and Rights
While allowing socio-economic reforms, the Court ensured such measures must not violate core constitutional values—maintaining harmony between change and constitutional integrity.Precedent for Future Judgments
Kesavananda has guided key rulings like Minerva Mills (1980), which invalidated parts of the 42nd Amendment, and I.R. Coelho (2007), which reviewed Ninth Schedule entries-reinforcing constitutional continuity.Upholding Democracy & Preventing Autocracy
Delivered amid political turbulence, the judgment safeguarded against authoritarian constitutional revisions, ensuring the Constitution remains a dynamic yet sturdy instrument.
This doctrine, born from the Kesavananda Bharati case (April 24, 1973), has profoundly shaped Indian constitutional jurisprudence:
Constitutional safeguard: It affirms Parliament’s power to amend under Article 368, but bars changes that damage the "basic structure" – core values like democracy, secularism, federalism, and fundamental rights.
Checks on Parliament: Limits arbitrary constitutional alterations by deeming partial or full erasure of essential principles unconstitutional.
Judicial authority: Empowers the Supreme Court as the final arbiter in reviewing amendments, reinforcing judicial independence and separation of powers
Case law reinforcement: Invoked in Minerva Mills (1980), Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), I.R. Coelho (2007), among others to strike down amendments violating core tenets.
Living Constitution: Ensures adaptability while preserving underlying structure, preventing drift toward authoritarianism
The Kesavananda doctrine continues to guide India’s constitutional future. Any new amendment will be measured against its basic structure. This means Parliament is free to reform the Constitution, but cannot dismantle its core identity. The judiciary remains vigilant: courts will strike down amendments that violate democracy, federalism, secularism or core rights. In practical terms, Kesavananda Bharati acts as a living guarantee that the power to amend is not absolute. For policy and legislative drafters, it signals that social and economic reforms must respect the Constitution’s foundational values. Looking ahead, this case ensures that India’s constitutional democracy endures, with judges as ultimate guardians of the Constitution’s “basic structure.”
With debates on population-based representation and rising demands for delimitation, the balance between constitutional equality and federal representation remains a sensitive issue. Explore how delimitation challenges federal equity and affects southern states: Basic Structure Doctrine: Evolution, Meaning, Supreme Court Cases & Significance - PadhAI
Q.Who was Kesavananda Bharati?
A.He was the chief pontiff (head) of the Edneer Mutt in Kasaragod, Kerala. His petition against land reform laws gave rise to the landmark case.
Q.How many judges heard this case?
A. A 13-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court (one of the largest ever) heard Kesavananda Bharati’s case.
Q.Which constitutional amendments were challenged?
A.The petition contested the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments, all of which related to land reform and Parliament’s amending power.
Q.How long did the Kesavananda case hearings last?
A.Arguments were heard over 68 days (from October 31, 1972 to March 23, 1973), making it one of the longest hearings in Supreme Court history.
Q. What doctrine did this case establish?
A.The case established the Basic Structure Doctrine. It limits Parliament’s amending power by holding that the Constitution’s basic framework cannot be altered, thus safeguarding fundamental rights and core values.
The Kesavananda Bharati case stands as a Supreme Court milestone that reshaped India’s constitutional architecture. By codifying the basic structure doctrine, it ensured that constitutional amendments cannot erode the Constitution’s essential features – including democracy, secularism and fundamental rights. In practice, the judgment curtailed any attempt at unlimited amending power by Parliament, empowering the courts to protect the Constitution through judicial review. For UPSC aspirants and scholars of Indian polity, Kesavananda Bharati remains an indispensable case: a reminder that India’s Constitution is a living document whose core values are protected against arbitrary change. Its legacy endures in every landmark judgment that strikes down an amendment threatening the Constitution’s basic structure.
Internal Linking Suggestions
How to Begin Your UPSC Preparation : The Ultimate Guide For Beginners
UPSC Previous Year Question Papers with Answers PDF - Prelims & Mains (2014-2024)
40 Most Important Supreme Court Judgements of India : Landmark Judgements UPSC
Article 32 of the Indian Constitution: Right to Constitutional Remedies, 5 Writs, Significance
Parliamentary Committees in India: Functions, Types & Significance, UPSC Notes
GST Council (Goods and Services Tax Council): Constitutional Provisions, Functions, Way Forward
External Linking Suggestions
UPSC Official Website – Syllabus & Notification: https://upsc.gov.in/
Press Information Bureau – Government Announcements: https://pib.gov.in/
NCERT Official Website – Standard Books for UPSC: https://ncert.nic.in
UPSC Notification 2025 was released on 22nd January 2025.
UPSC Prelims Question Paper 2025 and Unofficial Prelims Answer Key 2025 are available now.
UPSC Calendar 2026 is released on 15th May, 2025.
The UPSC Vacancy 2025 were released 1129, out of which 979 were for UPSC CSE and remaining 150 are for UPSC IFoS.
UPSC Mains 2025 will be conducted on 22nd August 2025.
UPSC Prelims 2026 will be conducted on 24th May, 2026 & UPSC Mains 2026 will be conducted on 21st August 2026.
The UPSC Selection Process is of 3 stages-Prelims, Mains and Interview.
UPSC Result 2024 is released with latest UPSC Marksheet 2024. Check Now!
UPSC Toppers List 2024 is released now. Shakti Dubey is UPSC AIR 1 2024 Topper.
