one sec, the case which we will discuss about, firstly we should know the importance of the case. Lights please! So when ever a student enters law college, his/her teachers and seniors definitely tells about Kesavananda Bharati Case to them, and say have you ever listened about this case which is the longest case in India. The proceedings of this case ran till 68 days and over 100 cases were sidelined for this case and to understand what is right and what is wrong the constitution of more than 70 countries were compared. the judgement of this case is 703 pages long, and the most important thing is that it is (Kesavananda Bharati Case vs the state of Kerala) one of the important case of our Indian constitution and we will discuss about this case in today's video Hey everybody! This is Priya and you are watching Finology Legal, so lets start today's video So lets understand the background of this case After the independence every state was rebuilding their social and economic conditions and after the formation of the constitution, when citizens get their fundamental rights they realize that equality is their right At that time the system was like that where the resources and means of production was up to certain people only and slowly they realized that the concentration of wealth is not at all right. and to change this all the states were up to make a change in their existing laws and system. and so the state government of Kerala also did the same for rebuilding the social and economic condition of their state like Zamindari system, land ownership, Tenancy laws for rebuilding this they passed Kerala Land reforms Act 1963 now this land reforms act put a restriction over that how much land anyone can own basically it restricted the property rights of the citizens so by using this act the Kerala government acquires the land of Edneer Mutt of Kasaragod district after this takeover by the government the income of the mutt totally gets effected and they were facing problems to manage the daily works of the mutt so this land acquisition was challenged by the head of the Edneer mutt The head of the Edneer mutt was Kesavananda Bharati and this case was represented in the Supreme Court by Nana Bhai Phalkivala This Land reform Act imposed restrictions on the citizens of their right to property that's why on March 1970, Kesavananda Bharati opposed and challenged this act and filed a writ petition in supreme court and said that this land reform act violates his fundamental right such as Art.14, Art 19 (f) Art.25 and Art.26 his saying was that to own a land and to manage it, is a fundamental right of a citizen and these fundamental rights should get protected. On that time many cases like this were running in supreme court such as Bank Nationalization Case, Madhav Rao Scindia Case, Golaknath Case etc etc. In all these case you will clearly see that, India's two most strongest parties was struggling with powers and these parties was Parliament and the supreme court on the one hand Parliament's saying was that through Art.368 they have the power to amend the constitution according to their will and they have unlimited powers. But Supreme court didn't agreed with the statement of the Parliament. The case of Golaknath vs. State of Punjab in which Supreme court's 11 judges bench was constituted and when they faced this question that if parliament has such huge powers to amend constitution and can change fundamental rights according to their will then this question was answered in this case by supreme court and they imposed many restrictions on the powers of Parliament for amending the constitution after that parliament introduced 24th, 25th and 29th Amendment act to remove restrictions from them and they can regain their powers So lets now understand about these 3 amendments also the 24th Amendment act gives Parliament the power to amend the fundamental rights and it says Parliament has power to amend any prov. of Constitution The 25th Amendment act said that Right to property can be curtailed their could be restrictions on right to property and government can acquire private property for public use and compensation for this would be decided by the Parliament and not by the court Next is 29th Amendment Act, this Amendment put Land Reforms Act under 9th Schedule what is special about 9th Schedule? the laws that goes under 9th Schedule can not be questioned. that laws cannot be reviewed on the court So after been put under the 9th Schedule the Land Reforms Act got immunity from get questioned So along with Land Reforms Act those 3 Constitutional Amendments were also challenged in kesavananda Bharati case So basically in this case many questions were raised but the main question of this case was that - Can Parliament amend the Fundamental Rights ? and secondly if the answer of the 1st question is "Yes" then what will be the extent of the powers that Parliament has and which provisions of the Constitution Parliament can amend. These were 2 main questions of this case Let's discuss the arguments of this case one by one from both petitioners and respondent sides firstly we will discuss the arguments from the petitioner side So the first point of the Petitioner was that, the Art.368 of the Constitution which gives Parliament the power to amend is not an absolute power, infact this power is limited so Parliament cannot change the provisions according to their will because this power is limited and restrictive. their 2nd point was that, the rights given in the Constitution is to protect the freedom of the citizen like Art.19 (1) (f) which says about Right to Property but the Petitioner sayings was that the 24th and 25th Amendment act which was inserted from Art.31 imposes restriction on Fundamental Rights of the citizen it curtails that. Which is a wrong act. The Respondents sayings was that Parliament has unlimited & absolute powers to amend the Constitution According to them every state has to better its social and economic conditions so in such situation no restriction should be imposed on Parliament's power because if their power gets restricted then they will never be able to fulfill the requirements of the society from time to time. As per Respondents, Parliament has powers to put restrictions on some Fundamental Rights such as Freedom of Speech & Expression, Right to form Association, Freedom of Religion Do you know that in this case till now the largest bench of 13 judges of Supreme court was constituted in this case So lets also look at the judgements of this case so the judgement of this case came out with the majority ratio of 7:6 where in the previous case of Golaknath vs. State of Punjab it has been said that Parliament cannot amend the Fundamental Rights this judgement was stated wrong and it got Overruled and along with that the 24th amendment act which was challenged in which the act says that Parliament can amend any provision of the Constitution it was stated valid. and Supreme court also said that under Art.368 Parliament has the absolute power to amend any provision of the Constitution but all this is the answer of the 1st question Now we will look after the 2nd question the questions asks, The Parliament has powers to what extent? So Supreme court answered this question perfectly and said Although Parliament has the power to amend any provision of the Constitution but they can use their amending powers to only that extent where they cannot interfere with basic and essential features and this called as Basic Structure Doctrine For more knowledge on Basic Structure you can also refer to this detailed video of mine where I have explained this concept very clearly and along with this 25th and 29th Amendment act were also declared valid in this case and also said that if there is any law which has been put under Schedule 9 but if they violates basic features of the Constitution then that laws can be judicially reviewed and challenged in the court So on 24th April 1973 this landmark judgment introduced Basic Structure Doctrine any Exhaustive list was not given in this case that these some features should only be the basic elements but an Indicative list was given that these features will qualify for the basic elements and also said that in future many other features could be add up in this list but any element is an essential element and any feature is a basic feature or not will be decided by the court on case by case basis. This case is so important because in this case Supreme court used its creativity and introduced a new doctrine "Basic Structure of Doctrine" through this on one hand they gave unlimited and absolute powers to the Parliament but on other hand they said Parliament cannot interfere with basic features also this one case safe guarded India's democracy for the upcoming years So this was today's video on between Kesavananda Bharati Vs. State of Kerala I hope you have learned something new and important today through this video if yes, then like and share this video and if you have any doubt related to this video then you ask me on comment section for more information like this you can subscribe my channel and you can also follow my Instagram page where we bring many interactive contents like this I hope you have liked today's video That's it for now, see you in the next class. Bye Bye!