Kesavananda Bharati Case: A Landmark Judgment in Indian Constitutional History by Santhosh kumar athaluri

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, famously known as the "Fundamental Rights case," is a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India that was delivered on April 24, 1973. The case is considered one of the most important and influential cases in Indian constitutional law history.

The case originated from a petition filed by Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, challenging the constitutionality of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. The act sought to impose restrictions on the ownership and transfer of land held by religious institutions in Kerala.

However, the case eventually became about much more than just the land reforms act, as it questioned the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Indian Constitution. The main argument put forward by Kesavananda Bharati was that the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution was not absolute, and there existed certain limitations on its power. In other words, the Constitution had certain "basic features" that could not be altered by the Parliament through an amendment.

The Supreme Court in a 7-6 decision upheld the petitioner's argument that there are indeed certain basic features of the Constitution that cannot be amended by Parliament. The court held that the basic structure of the Constitution includes features such as the sovereignty of India, the rule of law, the separation of powers, the federal character of the Constitution, and the protection of fundamental rights.

The judgment of the case had far-reaching implications for the Indian constitutional framework. It established the principle of judicial review, which means that the judiciary has the power to review the constitutional validity of laws passed by Parliament. The judgment also established that the Constitution is supreme and above any law or action taken by the government.

The case has been regarded as one of the most significant judgments in Indian legal history, and it has influenced several subsequent judgments of the Supreme Court. It has also helped in safeguarding the Indian democracy by ensuring that no government can change the basic structure of the Constitution to suit its political interests.

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark constitutional case in India, which was decided by the Supreme Court of India on April 24, 1973. The case is significant because it established the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution, which places certain fundamental principles beyond the reach of the Parliament of India.

The case was filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, challenging the constitutionality of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, which imposed restrictions on the ownership of land held by religious institutions. However, the case became much more significant than just the issue of land reform, as it led to a larger debate about the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.

The Supreme Court, by a narrow majority of 7-6, held that the Constitution of India has a basic structure that cannot be altered even by a constitutional amendment. The basic structure includes features such as the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, the principle of separation of powers, the federal character of the Constitution, and the protection of fundamental rights.

The Kesavananda Bharati case is considered to be one of the most important cases in the history of Indian constitutional law, and it has had a profound impact on the Indian legal system. It established the principle of judicial review as a key element of the Indian constitutional framework, and it has ensured that the Constitution remains a living document that can evolve and adapt to the changing needs of Indian society.

Facts 

The Kesavananda Bharati case is a complex case with a number of facts and legal issues involved.

Some of the key facts and issues that led to this landmark judgment are:

Kerala Land Reforms Act:

The case began as a challenge to the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, which sought to impose restrictions on the ownership and transfer of land held by religious institutions in Kerala. Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, argued that this act violated his fundamental rights and the rights of his religious institution.

Parliament's power to amend the Constitution:

The main issue in the case was whether Parliament had the power to amend the Constitution to such an extent that it would fundamentally alter the nature and character of the Constitution. The petitioner argued that there were certain "basic features" of the Constitution that could not be altered by Parliament.

Fundamental Rights:

The case also involved the question of whether fundamental rights, which are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, could be amended by Parliament. The petitioner argued that the fundamental rights were an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution and could not be amended.

Judicial Review:

The case raised the issue of the extent of the power of the judiciary to review laws passed by Parliament. The petitioner argued that the judiciary had the power to review laws and determine their constitutionality, including the power to strike down laws that violated fundamental rights or the basic structure of the Constitution.

Majority decision:

The judgment was delivered by a narrow majority of 7-6, with Chief Justice Sikri and six other judges in the majority. The majority held that the Constitution did indeed have certain basic features that could not be altered by Parliament. Overall, the Kesavananda Bharati case was a significant turning point in Indian constitutional history, and it established several key principles that continue to shape the Indian legal system today.

who involved in this

The Kesavananda Bharati case involved several key individuals, including:

Kesavananda Bharati: The petitioner and the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, who challenged the constitutionality of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963.

State of Kerala: The respondent in the case, which defended the constitutionality of the Kerala Land Reforms Act.

Chief Justice Sikri: The Chief Justice of India at the time of the judgment, who led the majority decision in favor of the petitioner.

Other judges: The judgment was delivered by a bench of 13 judges of the Supreme Court of India. In addition to Chief Justice Sikri, the judges who delivered the majority decision were Justice Shelat, Justice Hegde, Justice Grover, Justice Jaganmohan Reddy, Justice Khanna, and Justice Mitter. The dissenting judges were Justice Wanchoo, Justice Gupta, Justice Ray, Justice Palekar, Justice Mathew, and Justice Beg.

Lawyers: The case was argued by several prominent lawyers, including N.A. Palkhivala, who represented the petitioner, and Attorney General Niren De, who represented the Government of India.

what causes this

The Kesavananda Bharati case was primarily caused by a dispute over the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Indian Constitution. The case originated from a challenge to the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, which imposed restrictions on the ownership and transfer of land held by religious institutions in Kerala. Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu monastery in Kerala, argued that the land reforms act violated his fundamental rights and the rights of his religious institution.

However, the case soon became about much more than just the land reforms act, as it questioned the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution. The petitioner argued that there were certain "basic features" of the Constitution that could not be amended by Parliament, as these features were integral to the Constitution's nature and character.

The petitioner further argued that the fundamental rights, which were enshrined in Part III of the Constitution, were a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and could not be amended. The case thus raised important questions about the separation of powers, federalism, and the role of the judiciary in reviewing laws passed by Parliament. These issues had significant implications for the Indian constitutional framework, and the outcome of the case was seen as crucial for preserving the integrity and stability of the Indian democracy.

Final Conclusion

The Kesavananda Bharati case is a landmark judgment in Indian constitutional history that established several key principles that continue to shape the Indian legal system today. The case began as a challenge to the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, but it soon became a broader debate about the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution and the role of the judiciary in reviewing laws passed by Parliament.

The case raised important questions about fundamental rights, judicial review, and the separation of powers. The judgment, delivered by a narrow majority of 7-6, held that the Constitution had certain basic features that could not be amended by Parliament and that the judiciary had the power to review laws and determine their constitutionality, including the power to strike down laws that violated fundamental rights or the basic structure of the Constitution.

The Kesavananda Bharati case is seen as a turning point in Indian constitutional history, and it has had a significant impact on the evolution of the Indian legal system. The case has helped to establish the principle of judicial independence, the rule of law, and the protection of fundamental rights in India, and it has contributed to the development of a robust and vibrant democracy in the country.