Simone Lawson
The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, also known as the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, was heard by the largest-ever Constitution bench of 13 Supreme Court judges in India. The case was filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu religious institution in Kerala, challenging the constitutional validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Indian Constitution, which sought to limit the powers of the judiciary and the fundamental rights of citizens. The case was heard for 68 days and the judgment, delivered on April 24, 1973, outlined the Basic Structure doctrine of the Constitution, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be amended by Parliament.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Case Name | Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala |
| Case Number | Writ Petition (Civil) 135 of 1970 |
| Petitioner | Kesavananda Bharati |
| Respondent | State of Kerala |
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Bench Size | 13 Judges |
| Bench Comprised Of | Chief Justice S. M. Sikri, Justice J.M. Shelat, Justice K.S. Hegde, Justice A.N. Grover, Justice A.N. Ray, Justice P. Jaganmohan Reddy, Justice D.G. Palekar, Justice H.R. Khanna, Justice K.K. Mathew, Justice M.H. Beg, Justice S.N. Dwivedi, Justice A.K. Mukherjee, Justice Y.V. Chandrachud |
| Date of Judgment | 24 April 1973 |
| Judgement | The Parliament has wide powers but does not have the power to destroy the fundamental features of the Constitution |
| Judgement Ratio | 7-6 |
| Pages in Judgement | 700 |
| Keywords | Land reform, property rights, basic structure doctrine |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case was heard by the largest-ever Constitution bench of 13 Supreme Court judges in India. The case was heard for 68 days, and 11 different judgments were delivered. The Supreme Court ruled in a 7:6 majority judgment that the Parliament can amend every article in the Constitution but should be restrained from altering the "basic structure" of the Constitution.
The origins of the case can be traced back to the land reforms introduced in the Indian state of Kerala in the 1950s and 1960s. These reforms aimed to redistribute land from large landowners to the poor and landless. In 1963, the Kerala government passed the Kerala Land Reforms Act, which placed a limit on the amount of land a person could own. The Act provided for the acquisition of excess land from landowners for redistribution.
In 1970, the Kerala government imposed restrictions on the ownership of land held by religious institutions. Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head or pontiff of the Edneer Mutt, a Hindu religious institution, challenged the constitutionality of the Act in the Kerala High Court. He argued that the government's actions violated his fundamental rights, including his right to religion, freedom of religious denomination, and right to property.
The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of the state government. However, the Parliament of India passed the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Constitution, which sought to curtail the powers of the judiciary and limit the fundamental rights of citizens. Kesavananda Bharati then filed a petition challenging the validity of these amendments, arguing that they violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
The case was heard by a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court, making it one of the largest benches in Indian legal history. The bench took six months to hear the arguments and deliver its judgment. In a historic decision, the Supreme Court propounded the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution, holding that certain fundamental features, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, could not be amended by Parliament. The court also held that the power of judicial review is an integral part of the basic structure and could not be taken away by Parliament through constitutional amendments.
Caste System: Indian Constitution's Stance and Support
You may want to see also
The case was heard by 13 judges
In 1970, the head of a Hindu religious institution in Kerala, India, challenged the constitutionality of the Kerala Land Reforms Act. This act, passed in 1963, restricted the amount of land that religious institutions could own and provided for the acquisition of excess land from landowners for redistribution to the poor and landless. The case, known as Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala, eventually reached the Supreme Court of India, which ruled in favour of the state government. However, the Parliament of India passed several amendments to the Constitution that sought to curtail the powers of the judiciary and limit the fundamental rights of citizens.
Sri Kesavananda Bharati then filed a petition challenging the validity of these amendments, arguing that they violated the basic structure of the Constitution. This led to a landmark judgment, known as the Kesavananda Bharati Judgment, which was heard by a bench of 13 judges of the Supreme Court of India, making it one of the largest benches in Indian legal history. The bench was comprised of Chief Justice S. M. Sikri and Justices J.M. Shelat, K.S. Hegde, A.N. Grover, A.N. Ray, P. Jaganmohan Reddy, D.G. Palekar, H.R. Khanna, K.K. Mathew, M.H. Beg, S.N. Dwivedi, A.K. Mukherjee, and Y.V. Chandrachud.
The case involved important constitutional questions regarding the powers of Parliament to amend the Constitution. The bench took six months to hear the arguments and deliver its final judgment. In a historic 7:6 majority decision, the Supreme Court propounded the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended by Parliament. The court also held that the power of judicial review is an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be taken away by Parliament through constitutional amendments.
The Kesavananda Bharati case is considered one of the most important in Indian constitutional history, and Sri Kesavananda Bharati is remembered as a key figure in the fight to uphold the principles of democracy and the rule of law in India. The case established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution and outlined the limitations of the powers of elected representatives and the nature of the fundamental rights of individuals.
Constitution's Reach: Reservations and Sovereign Rights
You may want to see also
It outlined the Basic Structure Doctrine
The Basic Structure Doctrine is a judicial principle in Indian constitutional law that prevents the Parliament from altering the fundamental framework of the Constitution. It was introduced in the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, which was heard by the largest-ever Constitution bench of 13 Supreme Court judges. The case was filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu religious institution in Kerala, challenging the constitutional validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Indian Constitution, which sought to curtail the powers of the judiciary and limit the fundamental rights of citizens.
The Basic Structure Doctrine holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended by Parliament. It is a crucial legal principle that has shaped the interpretation of India's Constitution, safeguarding the essential principles and values that reflect the vision of the framers. The doctrine strikes a balance between flexibility and rigidity in the power to amend the Constitution, and it has been affirmed and clarified in several subsequent cases, solidifying its status as a constitutional principle.
The origins of the Kesavananda Bharati case can be traced back to the land reforms introduced in Kerala in the 1950s and 1960s, which aimed to redistribute land from large landowners to the landless and poor. In 1970, the Kerala government imposed restrictions on the ownership of land held by religious institutions, and Sri Kesavananda Bharati challenged the constitutionality of these restrictions. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the state government. However, the Parliament of India passed several amendments that sought to limit the powers of the judiciary and restrict fundamental rights.
Sri Kesavananda Bharati then filed a petition challenging the validity of these amendments, arguing that they violated the basic structure of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a historic 7:6 majority decision, upheld the Basic Structure Doctrine and placed limits on the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. This judgment became a landmark in Indian constitutional history, and Sri Kesavananda Bharati is remembered as a key figure in the fight to uphold the principles of democracy and the rule of law in India.
The Indian Constitution: A Framework Finalized
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The case was filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharati
The case of Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala, also known as the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, was filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head or senior pontiff of the Edneer Mutt or Edneer Matha, a Hindu religious institution in Kerala, India. The case was heard by the largest-ever Constitution Bench of 13 Supreme Court judges, including Chief Justice S. M. Sikri. It is considered a landmark judgment that outlined the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution.
The origins of the case can be traced back to land reforms introduced in Kerala in the 1950s and 1960s, which aimed to redistribute land from large landowners to the landless and poor. In 1963, the Kerala Land Reforms Act was passed, limiting land ownership and providing for the acquisition and redistribution of excess land. In 1970, the Kerala government imposed restrictions on the ownership of land held by religious institutions, including the Edneer Mutt.
Sri Kesavananda Bharati challenged the constitutionality of these restrictions, arguing that they violated the right to manage religiously-owned property without government interference. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the state government. However, in the meantime, the Parliament of India passed the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments, which sought to curtail the powers of the judiciary and limit the fundamental rights of citizens.
Sri Kesavananda Bharati then filed a petition challenging the validity of these amendments, arguing that they violated the basic structure of the Constitution. The case was heard by the largest-ever Constitution Bench of 13 judges in the Supreme Court, who delivered their judgment on April 24, 1973. The court ruled in a 7-6 decision that while Parliament has 'wide' powers, it does not have the power to destroy or fundamentally alter the Constitution's basic structure. This judgment established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution and is considered a significant moment in Indian constitutional history.
The Secularism Promise in India's Constitution
You may want to see also
The case challenged the constitutional validity of amendments
The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, heard by a bench of 13 judges, is one of the largest constitutional benches in the history of the Supreme Court of India. The case challenged the constitutional validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Indian Constitution.
The origins of the Kesavananda Bharati case can be traced back to the land reforms introduced in the Indian state of Kerala in the 1950s and 1960s. These reforms aimed to redistribute land from large landowners to the landless and the poor. In 1963, the Kerala government passed the Kerala Land Reforms Act, which restricted the amount of land a person could own. The Act allowed the government to acquire excess land from landowners and redistribute it to those without land.
In 1970, the Government of Kerala imposed restrictions on the ownership of land held by religious institutions. Sri Kesavananda Bharati, the head of the Edneer Mutt (a Hindu religious institution), challenged the constitutionality of the Act in the Kerala High Court. The case eventually reached the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of the state government.
During this time, the Parliament of India passed the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Constitution. These amendments sought to curtail the powers of the judiciary, limit the scope of judicial review, and restrict the fundamental rights of citizens. In response, Sri Kesavananda Bharati filed a petition challenging the validity of these amendments, arguing that they violated the basic structure of the Constitution.
The Kesavananda Bharati case is significant because it established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. The Supreme Court, in a historic 7:6 majority decision, upheld this doctrine, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended by Parliament. The court also affirmed that the power of judicial review is an integral part of the basic structure and cannot be taken away by Parliament through constitutional amendments.
The Constitution of India: A Comprehensive Guide
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala.
13.
The court held that while the Parliament has 'wide' powers, it did not have the power to destroy or change the fundamental features of the Constitution.
The case concerned the right to manage religiously-owned property without government interference.
The case is also known as the Fundamental Rights Case.
