Lecture Notes on Keshavananda Bharati Case

Introduction

• Speaker: Anarch Nakade
• Topic: Keshavananda Bharati Case, significant in Indian legal history
• Date of Judgment: April 24, 1973
• Duration of Proceedings: 68 days in the Supreme Court
• Importance: Considered a turning point in the constitutional framework of India

Context

• Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, announced a dedicated webpage for the judgment to assist researchers.

The Supreme Court and Judicial Precedents

• Supreme Court as a Court of Record:
  • Every judgment interpreting the Constitution becomes law of the land.
  • Higher bench judgments bind lower bench judgments.
• The Keshavananda Bharati case was heard by the largest bench (13 judges) in India's history.

Historical Background

• Kerala Land Reforms Act of 1963:
  • Aimed to distribute large parcels of land owned by few to landless people.
  • Adinir Mutt, led by Swami Keshavananda Bharati, owned significant land subject to this act.
• Challenge to the Act:
  • Bharati contested that the act violated his fundamental right to property and infringed upon rights to equality and religious affairs.

Constitutional Amendments Involved

• Amendments Challenged:
  • 24th Amendment: Gave Parliament power to amend any part of the Constitution.
  • 25th Amendment: Curtailed the fundamental right to property.
  • 29th Amendment: Placed Kerala Land Reforms Act in the Ninth Schedule, preventing Supreme Court review.
• Article 368: Grants Parliament the power to amend the Constitution.

Legal Questions Raised

• Can Parliament amend the Constitution to revoke fundamental rights?
• Can the Supreme Court review Parliament's power to amend the Constitution?

Supreme Court’s Decision

• The Supreme Court overruled the Golakhnath case and held that Parliament can amend fundamental rights.
  • Upheld the 24th Amendment.
• Basic Structure Doctrine:
  • Introduced the concept that certain fundamental aspects of the Constitution cannot be altered, even by Parliament.
  • Elements include democracy, independence of judiciary, secularism, equality, etc.

Implications of the Judgment

• Parliament cannot amend the basic structure to establish a dictatorial government.
• Judicial review applies to laws, including those in the Ninth Schedule, if they violate the basic structure.

Conclusion

• Case is foundational in Indian constitutional law, influencing future amendments and judicial reviews.
• Call to action: Viewers encouraged to like, comment, and subscribe for more detailed breakdowns.