[Type here]

SEMESTER 1
LEGAL METHODS

I YEAR B.A LL. B (HONS)- RESEARCH PROJECT

Basic Structure Doctrine of the Indian Constitution

Tamil Nadu National Law University, Tiruchirapalli

Submitted by: Chezhian RV

Submitted to: Mr. S. Mohammed Azaad

Assistant Professor of Law
Tamil Nadu National Law University

1
[Type here]

DECLARATION

I, Chezhian RV hereby declare that this project work titled “Basic Structure
Doctrine of the Indian Constitution” is submitted as part of the partial
fulfillment of the evaluation/ assessment component for this semester. This
project work is original and has NOT been submitted either or in part of any
degree/ diploma/ conference/ seminar/ project/assignment/ journal/blog, of
any institution or university

Date: 25-08-2024
Signature: Chezhian RV

2
[Type here]

Acknowledgment

I, Chezhian RV would like to thank Mr. S. Mohammed Azaad

, Asst. prof. of. Law for his constant support and guidance during this research
paper. Without his constant support and guidance, this research paper would not be
possible. I would further extend my gratitude to Prof. Dr. V. Nagaraj, our Vice
Chancellor for providing me with the opportunity to work on the paper and learn
during the process of it. I would also like to thank my family, and friends for their
extended cooperation.

3
[Type here]

Table of Contents
CHAPTER I.....................................................................................................................................9
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................9
AIM............................................................................................................................................10
HYPOTHESIS...........................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER II..................................................................................................................................10
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES......................................................................................................10
RESEARCH QUESTIONS.......................................................................................................10
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................11
CHAPTER III................................................................................................................................11
WHY BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE................................................................................11
EVOLUTION OF THE DOCTRINE........................................................................................13
EMPHASIS ON KESAVANANDA BHARATI........................................................................16
COMPARISON OF OTHER COUNTRIES..............................................................................17
CHAPTER IV................................................................................................................................21
LITERATURE REVIEW...........................................................................................................21
CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................21
BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................................................22

4
[Type here]

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

The Doctrine of Basic Structure is a judicially devised principle that was developed by the
Supreme Court in the 1960s and 1970s and was finally put forward by the apex court in the case
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala in 1973. This principle puts forth an argument that there
are certain core values, principles, and features of the Constitution that cannot be amended by
the Parliament. Any amendment that tries to alter these inviolable features of the Constitution
will be regarded as unconstitutional and void. This doctrine acts as a safety measure against
core-altering changes put forth by the parliament thereby guaranteeing the steadiness, continuity,
and conformity of the Constitution.

The Doctrine is said to preserve the ‘soul’ of the constitution. A few elements of the constitution
that the Basic Structure protects are
● Supremacy of the Constitution
● Secular Character of the Constitution
● Federal Character of the Constitution
● Unity and Integrity of the Constitution
● Sovereign, Democratic, and Republican nature of the Indian Polity

However, such a significant principle of the Indian Constitution is not mentioned anywhere in
the Constitution of India. Even Though the Basic Structure doctrine was first introduced in the
case Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala in 1973, it has a longer evolutionary history.

The Basic Structure doctrine of India is said to protect us against the banes of Democracy like
Authoritarianism and Majoritarianism. But ironically some people claim that Basic Structure is
undemocratic in nature because the people’s representatives are replaced by unelected lordships
who hold the power to reject amendments.

In a Democracy where the judiciary, legislature, and executives have equal power, some people
claim the Basic Structure Doctrine grants more power to the Judiciary. One of those critics
happens to be Arun Jaitley who termed the principle “Tyranny of the unelected” which aligns
with the other critics who claim that the power of amending the Constitution held by the
parliament of elected representatives is directly conflicted by the judges of the Supreme court
who are in no way elected by the people of the country. The Basic Structure Doctrine practiced
in India is also practiced in other countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Uganda.

5
[Type here]

We will also look into the difference made by the case Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
on the Doctrine of Basic Structure even though it has preceding cases that have used Basic
Structure.

AIM

The Research aims to study The Basic Structure doctrine of India and its applications in the
Indian judicial system.

HYPOTHESIS

The Hypothesis of the research is to prove that The Basic Structure Doctrine of the Indian
Constitution is of paramount importance to the core values and features of the Constitution.

CHAPTER II
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

1. To Understand the principles of The Basic Structure Doctrine of the Indian Constitution

2. To Analyse the evolutionary path of the Basic Structure Doctrine throughout Indian judicial
history

3. To compare and contrast the Basic Structure Doctrine of India with that of other countries

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. Does the Indian Constitution have a Basic Structure?

2. Has the Basic Structure Doctrine of the Indian Consitution evolved through the course of
Indian Judicial history?

3. How does the Basic Structure Doctrine of our country weigh up to those of other
countries in comparison?

6
[Type here]

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In the upcoming study of the Basic Structure Doctrine, I intend to resort to secondary sources
which include books, articles, journals, and publications from various sets of websites. My
research paper will systematically deconstruct the case by employing analytic and descriptive
methods.

My research will primarily rely on secondary data which involves the merging of previously
existing information, which is usually referred to as primary data. I intend to integrate these
primary data with various other publications from different websites to provide original insights
termed secondary data.

Secondary research is employed due to its reputation of being expedient and time-saving.

The reliability and momentousness of my research project can be inferred due to

my use of reputable and relevant internet sources like SSC online and E-proxy
where a plethora of information concerning my research can be found.

CHAPTER III
WHY BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE

The Basic Structure Doctrine of the Indian Constitution is a judicially devised principle
and cannot be found anywhere in the Constitution of our country. It safely guards the
‘Soul’ and integrity of the Constitution by declaring core features of the Constitution like
Fundamental rights inviolable, meaning the Parliament can never amend them.

Constitutional Integrity:

1. Restrictions on Amending Powers. There are certain principles in the Constitution that
make up its core which is to be rigid in all situations, Thus the amending power of the
parliament in our country has been limited only to the flexible features of the
Constitution. Unlimited power to amend the Constitution can undermine something that
is religiously followed in our Country.

7
[Type here]

2. Supremacy of the Constitution

It serves as a reminder that the Constitution is Supreme and serves as the country's
highest law. Thus protecting the foundational principles in the Constitution from being
imperiled.

3. Prevention of Authoritarianism
It acts as a defense mechanism against Authoritarian sentiments which might
ultimately seek to undermine norms and destroy democratic institutions. It also
strips away any unequal power from one organ of the government making all
three organs equally powerful which is important to run a chaos-free country.

4. Constitutional Morality
The doctrine ensures that constitutional amendments adhere to the overarching values of
justice, equality, and fairness, thereby upholding constitutional morality

5. Maintenance of Democracy
India’s status as a Sovereign, Secular, Democratic is being upheld by protecting certain
core values enshrined in the Constitution of India

6. Independence of judiciary
The Basic Structure Doctrine aims to strengthen the judiciary’s independence by
providing it with the ability to reject amendments that conflict with the Basic Structure of
our Constitution. While doing so, it is also supportive of the rule of law and basic
individual rights.

7. Stability and Continuity

The Basic Structure provides stability to the country’s constitution by preventing any
significant and sudden changes that alter the whole meaning of the constitution. While
the law has to gradually adapt to society in order to function and be relevant in our
society, A law that changes every day is no law. Maintenance of its core principles is the
top priority of the Constitution.

8. Dynamic Interpretation
The specific elements of the Basic Structure in India have not been judiciously defined,
the doctrine proposes space for flexibility and change to adapt to the changing society.
This change is most usually done through judicially devised interpretations.

8
[Type here]

EVOLUTION OF THE DOCTRINE

The Basic Structure Doctrine as we know it has gone through ample evolutionary stages through
landmark judgments post-independence. Starting from 1951 the evolution reflects a complex
reciprocation between the judiciary and the legislature.
The conflict between the judiciary and legislature regarding Article 368 gave birth to the
evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine.

● Shankari Prasad vs Union of India (1951)

The case of Shankari Prasad is one of the first cases that sparked the evolution of the
Basic Structure Doctrine, The case was not directly involved with Basic Structure so it
didn't lead to the establishment of the Doctrine.
1. Initial Position on Amending Power:
The Apex Court of India proposed that the Parliament holds the power to amend/change
any part of the Constitution which includes the rigid core values under Article 368. The
court further goes on to say that Article 13 did not include amendments to the
constitution, thereby granting parliament the power to restrict or truncate Fundamental
rights.
2. No Limitation on Amending Power:
The judgment supported the Constitutional validity of the First Amendment Act, of 1951,
which restricted the right to property which is a fundamental right. This indicates the
unlimited power of the parliament to amend the constitution.
3. Setting the Stage for Future Debates:
The case was the beginning of a series of interpretations by the judiciary that would later
come to a crescendo in the Kesavananada Bharati judgment, which introduced the Basic
Structure doctrine.

● Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1965)

The case of Sajjan Singh played an important role in the evolution of the Basic Structure
doctrine
1. Majority View:
The Constitutional validity of the Seventeenth Amendment Act, of 1964, was upheld by
the majority of the Supreme Court bench. The bench further amended Article 31A and

9
[Type here]

added a number of statutes to the Ninth schedule. The court following the earlier
judgment of Shankari Prasad v. UOI, held that parliament has unlimited power to amend
the Constitution of India, under Article 368.
2. Dissenting Opinions:
The dissenting opinions of Justices J.R. Mudholkar and M. Hidayatullah are crucial in
the context of the Basic Structure Doctrine. Justice Mudholkar questioned if the power of
Article 368 included the authority to change core features of the Constitution. This was
the first instance where the Basic Structure of the Constitution was introduced.
3. Overruling and Subsequent Development:
The judgment given by the Supreme Court bench in this case was overruled in I.C
Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), Which held parliament only has limited rights while
amending the Constitution.

● Golak Nath v. State of Punjab (1967)

The case of Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, although not establishing the doctrine directly
played a crucial role in the Development of Basic Structure Doctrine.
1. Limitation on Amending Power:
The Supreme Court announced that the Parliament can not amend the Fundamental rights
etched in part III of the Constitution. This decision was in contrast to the stand of the
Supreme Court in the Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951) case.
2. Judicial Review and Protection of Fundamental Rights:
In Article 13(2) any changes to the Constitution will be considered ‘law’ and is therefore
subject to Part III of our Constitution. This meant any changes to the core values such as
the fundamental rights would be staged for judicial review to ensure the safety of these
rights.
3. Setting the Stage for Basic Structure Doctrine:
Although Golak Nath did not Introduce the concept of the Basic Structure Doctrine, it
served as a significant starting point for the application of the Basic Structure Doctrine in
future cases. The protection of Fundamental rights was emphasized in the judgment, this
case later became a keystone of the Basic Structure doctrine.
4. Overruling and Subsequent Development:
The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) overruled the judgment in this
case, Formally introducing the doctrine of Basic Structure.

10
[Type here]

● Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

The case of Kesavanda Bharati v. State of Kerala was the most crucial case in the
evolution of the Basic Structure doctrine. It formally established the doctrine of Basic
Structure.
1. Establishment of the Doctrine:
The Supreme Court Introduced the Basic Structure doctrine in a 7-6 Majority decision of
the Supreme Court bench. This doctrine held that certain parts of the Constitution like the
fundamental rights cannot be amended by the parliament and the core values were
considered inviolable by law
2. Limitation on Amending Power:
The power of the Parliament to amend articles in the Constitution is limited and not
absolute. The amendments should not affect the Basic Structure of the Constitution in
any way as they are essential features of the Constitution.
3. Identification of Core Principles:
The core principles identified in the judgment to be part of the Basic Structure Include
democracy, secularism, federalism, the rule of law, and the independence of the judiciary.
These principles make up the identity of the Constitution and cannot be amended.
4. Overruling of Golak Nath:
The Golak Nath case closed the gates for amendments against Fundament rights, but the
changes made in Kesavananda Bharati opened the gates to an extent where the
fundamental rights can be amended as long as they don't alter the Basic Structure of the
Constitution.
5. Judicial Review:
The judgment reaffirmed the capacity of judicial reviews as an instrumental part of the
Basic Structure. The judicial review gives the judiciary the power to strike down any
amendments that infringe on the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
6. Significance and Impact:
Any attempt at undermining the Constitution is rejected through the Basic Structure
Doctrine. It ensures that the constitution stays as a living document while the rigidity of
its basic features is not questioned.
7. Challenged Amendments:
The validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments was specifically challenged by this
case. Even though the court validated these Amendments, it did so with a warning that
the basic structure should not be altered.

11
[Type here]

● Indira Nehru Gandhi vs Raj Narain (1975)

Affirmation and Expansion: The Apex Court re-acknowledged the Kesavananda Bharati
judgment and added that the rule of law, judicial review, and democracy were important
features of the Constitution and contents of the Basic structure. This further strengthened
the doctrine.

● Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980)

Clarity and Limitations: The limited and not-so-absolute power of the parliament to
amend the Constitution under Article 368 was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in the
case of Minerva Mills Ltd. The emphasis on balance between directive principles of state
policy and fundamental rights was part of the Basic structure. Any changes that derailed
this balance were regarded as Unconstitutional

● L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)

Judicial Review as Part of Basic Structure: The Supreme Court restated that the capacity
of judicial review under Articles 32 and 226 was a key part of the basic structure and
cannot be weakened by giving these powers to Administrative tribunals.

EMPHASIS ON KESAVANANDA BHARATI

Historical background:

The origins of the Kesavananda Bharati case can be traced back to the land reforms that were
introduced in the Indian state of Kerala in the 1950s and 1960s. These reforms were aimed at
redistributing land from large landowners to the landless and the poor. In 1963, the Kerala
government passed the Kerala Land Reforms Act, which placed a limit on the amount of land
that a person could hold. The Act provided for the acquisition of excess land from landowners
and its distribution to the landless and the poor.

The Case filed by Sri Kesavananda Bharathi was heard for 68 days and to this day holds the spot
for the longest proceeding to take place in the Apex Court of India. This case was also known as
the Fundamental Rights Case and holds immense importance in the history of the Indian
judiciary.

The supreme issue in this case was the friction between constitutional amendments and the
fundamental rights of the citizens as promised by the Constitution. The Constitution holds dear

12
[Type here]

the fundamental rights of the citizens which was infringed upon by the parliamentary
amendments which gave rise to the petition filed by Kesavananda Bharati.

Aftermath of the case:

This case set a precedent that the core fundamental principles in the constitution cannot be
challenged or amended by the legislature, and acts as a preventive measure against further
encroachment by legislative changes.

The Basic Structure doctrine was then laid down which states the legislature has boundless
power to change and amend the constitution unless and until it infringes on the basic structure of
the Constitution.

The significance of this judgment questions the power of the parliament and protects
constitutional values. Studying this legal proceeding can be crucial for a Law student as its
reasoning and implications are momentous.

COMPARISON OF OTHER COUNTRIES

1. PAKISTAN and INDIA

The Basic Structure doctrine has been adopted in both Pakistan and India but is
interpreted differently.

● Origin and Development

India:
The Basic Structure was established formally through Kesavananda Bharati v.
State of Kerala a Landmark case in Indian Judicial history. The judgment
proposed that there are certain core principles in the Constitution are inviolable
meaning they cannot be changed or destroyed by the Legislature.
Pakistan:
The Doctrine of basic structure was adopted differently in Pakistan. The Supreme
Court of Pakistan introduced the Salient Features Doctrine (SFD), Which has
distinctions from the Basic Structure Doctrine. Recognized in the Constitutional
Petition No.12 of 2010 in 2015. Where judges from everywhere accepted the
principle of salient features that make up the Constitution’s core.

13
[Type here]

● Key Principles and Features

India:
The Basic Structure Doctrine in India Includes Core features such as secularism,
democracy, federalism, rule of law, and judicial review. These are unamendable features
of the Constitution which make up its identity Pakistan:
The SFD or Salient features doctrine identifies federalism, democracy, and independence
of the judicial body. However, the Supreme Court of Pakistan does not provide a
comprehensive list and is more nuanced when compared to the Basic Structure Doctrine.

● Judicial Review and Power

India:
The Apex court in India has the power to review and reject amendments devised by the
legislature that infringe upon the basic structure. This capacity of judicial review is a
keystone and ensures the safety of the Constitution’s core principles.
Pakistan:
The Amendments are also reviewed in Pakistan, but the scope and implementation of this
capacity are defined under the Salient Features Doctrine. The doctrine’s implementation
is more context-specific and not rigidly followed when compared to the Basic structure
Doctrine of India.

● Historical Context and Evolution

India:
The Basic structure’s evolutionary path goes through multiple cases, including Shankari
Prasad, Golak Nath, and Kesavananda Bharati. These cases progressively strengthened
the capacity of the Basic Structure Doctrine and limited the power of the legislature to
amend constitutional features.
Pakistan:
The Salient Features Doctrine in Pakistan was drafted and enforced relatively later, the
important parts of evolution include the 2015 judgment in Constitution Petition No.12 of
2010. This case acted as a turning point in limiting the parliament’s amending power but
the Basic structure was not entirely adopted.

● Criticism and Debate

India:
The Basic Structure has a subjective nature for which it has been criticized since its
establishment, it also has the potential to give the judiciary unequal which might cause an
imbalance.

14
[Type here]

Pakistan:
The Salient Features Doctrine has also faced criticism for its inconsistency and obscurity.
Some justices place an argument that it could lead to judicial capacity triumphing over
legislature and executive.

While both India and Pakistan recognize the significance of safeguarding the core features of the
Constitution, the Basic structure in India has more clarity and consistency when compared with
the Salient features doctrine. They both have distinct evolutionary paths which can be credited to
different constitutional and historical background

2. BANGLADESH and INDIA

The Basic Structure Doctrine established in India is also adopted by Bangladesh but there are
distinctions in the interpretations.

● Origin and Development

India:
The Basic Structure was established formally through Kesavananda Bharati v. State of
Kerala a Landmark case in Indian Judicial history. The judgment proposed that there are
certain core principles in the Constitution are inviolable meaning they cannot be changed
or destroyed by the Legislature.
Bangladesh:
The Doctrine of Basic Structure was adopted by the Apex Court of Bangladesh in 1989
through the case Anwar Hossain Chowdhury v. Bangladesh. The judgment was based on
the reasoning in Kesavananda Bharati thereby enforcing the Doctrine of Basic structure.

● Constitutional Recognition
India: The Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution is a judicially devised principle, and
not mentioned anywhere in the constitution. The basic principles of the structure have not
been meticulously defined, for flexibility allowing changes over time.
Bangladesh:
The Country of Bangladesh has established the Basic Structure doctrine by mentioning
its constitutional provisions. Article 7B of the Bangladesh constitution explicitly states
that certain provisions of the constitution are unamendable, This makes Bangladesh the
only legal system that has documented the doctrine in the world.

15
[Type here]

● Key Principles and Features

India:
The Basic Structure Doctrine in India Includes Core features such as secularism,
democracy, federalism, rule of law, and judicial review. These are unamendable features
of the Constitution which make up its identity Bangladesh:
The Bangladesh adaptation also guards these but is more explicitly defined through
Article 7B. The features protected under the Basic Structure doctrine include parts I, II,
and III of the Constitution which contains fundamental rights and other important core
values.
● Judicial Review and Power
India:
The Apex court in India has the power to review and reject amendments devised by the
legislature that infringe upon the basic structure. This capacity of judicial review is a
keystone and ensures the safety of the Constitution’s core principles.
Bangladesh:
Article 7B of the Constitution allows the judiciary to review and strike down
constitutional amendments made by the legislature. The ability to strike down
amendments is explicitly noted in constitutional provisions which provides a clear
structure for this review

● Impact and Evolution

India:
The doctrine of Basic Structure has been applied consistently in various cases since
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. It remains a strong and important safeguard
against the amendments of the parliament that infringe on the core constitutional values
and ensures a balance of stability in the nation.
Bangladesh:
The Article 7B introduced in 2011 significantly changed the application of the Basic
structure doctrine in Bangladesh. The straightforward unamendability of certain features
has reduced the reliability of the judicially developed basic structure doctrine, as seen in
the Asaduzzaman case, in this instance the court relied on Article 7B to reject a
constitutional amendment.

16
[Type here]

● Criticism and Debate

India:
The Basic Structure has a subjective nature for which it has been criticized since its
establishment, it also has the potential to give the judiciary unequal which might cause an
imbalance. Bangladesh:
Codifying the doctrine via Article 7B has been considered a positive change/development
by a few people, as it is clear and stable and provides the same qualities. Others argue
that it might potentially limit the flexibility needed for constitutional growth.

CHAPTER IV
LITERATURE REVIEW

● BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE — NO TROJAN HORSE 9

SCC J-29 BY V. SUDISH PAI
This article highlights that under Article 368 of the Indian constitution, the Parliament is given
amending powers when in its constituent capacity. But it contradicts Article 368 by saying that,
the amending power of the parliament is not in any capacity unlimited and has its ceilings. We
can infer from this article that the Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution supersedes Article
368 in multiple ways.

● Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution: Doctrine of Constitutionally

Controlled Governance: [From Kesavananda Bharati to I.R Coehlo]
- by Virendra Kumar

This article explains the meaning of Basic Structure as the Grundnorm (the basic norm) of the
Constitution which cannot be amended or abolished by the parliament under Article 368.
Changing the basic features of a basic document like the Constitution can change its whole
meaning and function which will only result in jeopardy.

● The Unconventional Dimensions of the Basic Structure Doctrine: An Insight -

by Sayan Mukherjee

This article gave me great insights into some of the critical aspects of the Basic Structure
Doctrine of the Indian Constitution.

17
[Type here]

CONCLUSION

The Basic Structure Doctrine of India might have done a good job of protecting the constitution
but it lacks clarity and is not precise, it is difficult to execute and enforce such a doctrine given it
does not have a constitutional basis. It is not openly supported by any provisions in the
constitution, this further leads to the confusion of the contents of the basic structure in our
constitution.

Subjectivity is one of the worst qualities of the Basic Structure Doctrine it can vary based on the
lordship’s interpretations which can lead to conflicts among the judiciary
Critics also feel that the Basic structure doctrine gives the judiciary more power by enabling the
judges to engage in judicial activism as The Basic Structure doctrine is a subjective dynamic.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

● BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE — NO TROJAN HORSE 9 SCC J-29 BY V. SUDISH PAI

● Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution: Doctrine of Constitutionally Controlled

Governance: [From Kesavananda Bharati to I.R Coehlo]
- by Virendra Kumar

● The Unconventional Dimensions of the Basic Structure Doctrine: An Insight - by

Sayan Mukherjee

18