{"id":24608,"date":"2026-05-18T08:25:12","date_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:25:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=24608"},"modified":"2026-05-18T08:27:34","modified_gmt":"2026-05-18T08:27:34","slug":"doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/","title":{"rendered":"Doctrine of Basic Structure: Judicial Shield of the Indian Constitution"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"introduction-to-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Introduction\"><\/span>Introduction<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Constitution of India is one of the most detailed and progressive written Constitutions in the world. It defines the powers of different organs of government and also protects the fundamental rights and duties of citizens. Article 368 of the Indian Constitution grants Parliament the power to amend the Constitution according to the changing needs of society and governance.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_83 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Introduction\" >Introduction<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Background\" >Background<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Phase_I_%E2%80%93_Parliamentary_Supremacy_Phase_1951%E2%80%931967\" >Phase I \u2013 Parliamentary Supremacy Phase (1951\u20131967)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Shankari_Prasad_v_Union_of_India\" >Shankari Prasad v. Union of India<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Sajjan_Singh_v_State_of_Rajasthan\" >Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Phase_II_%E2%80%93_Judicial_Supremacy_Phase_1967%E2%80%931973\" >Phase II \u2013 Judicial Supremacy Phase (1967\u20131973)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Golak_Nath_v_State_of_Punjab\" >Golak Nath v. State of Punjab<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Phase_III_%E2%80%93_Formation_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine_1973\" >Phase III \u2013 Formation of the Basic Structure Doctrine (1973)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Kesavananda_Bharati_v_State_of_Kerala\" >Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Importance_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\" >Importance of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Key_Features_Protected_Under_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\" >Key Features Protected Under the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Landmark_Judgments_on_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\" >Landmark Judgments on Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Kesavananda_Bharati_v_State_of_Kerala_1973\" >Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Facts\" >Facts<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Issue\" >Issue<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Judgment\" >Judgment<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Importance\" >Importance<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Minerva_Mills_v_Union_of_India_1980\" >Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Indira_Nehru_Gandhi_v_Raj_Narain_1975\" >Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-20\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#SR_Bommai_v_Union_of_India_1994\" >S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-21\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Elements_of_Basic_Structure\" >Elements of Basic Structure<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-22\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Constitutional_Principles\" >Constitutional Principles<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-23\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Democratic_Principles\" >Democratic Principles<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-24\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Federal_and_Secular_Principles\" >Federal and Secular Principles<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-25\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Rights_and_Judicial_Protection\" >Rights and Judicial Protection<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-26\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Expansion_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\" >Expansion of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-27\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Evaluation_of_the_Doctrine\" >Evaluation of the Doctrine<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-28\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Positive_Evaluation\" >Positive Evaluation<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-29\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Key_Benefits_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\" >Key Benefits of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-30\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Criticism_of_the_Doctrine\" >Criticism of the Doctrine<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-31\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Major_Criticisms_at_a_Glance\" >Major Criticisms at a Glance<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-32\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Significance_of_the_Doctrine\" >Significance of the Doctrine<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-33\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Importance_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine-2\" >Importance of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-34\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Conclusion\" >Conclusion<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-35\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#References\" >References<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-36\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Books\" >Books<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-37\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Case_Laws\" >Case Laws<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-38\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/doctrine-of-basic-structure-judicial-shield-of-the-indian-constitution\/#Websites\" >Websites<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<p>Over time, an important constitutional question arose regarding whether Parliament has unlimited power to amend every part of the Constitution. This issue created conflict between the legislature and the judiciary regarding the extent of Parliament\u2019s amending powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>To resolve this conflict, the Supreme Court developed the Doctrine of Basic Structure in the bench mark and seminal case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala [1973]. The Supreme Court held that Parliament can amend the Constitution, but it cannot destroy or alter its basic structure or essential features.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Basic Structure Doctrine protects the core principles and values of the Indian Constitution. It preserves constitutional supremacy, democracy, judicial review, secularism, and the rule of law. The doctrine acts as a safeguard against arbitrary constitutional amendments and helps in maintaining the identity of the Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"background-of-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Background\"><\/span>Background<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The evolution of the Basic Structure Doctrine can be divided into three important constitutional phases:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Phase<\/th><th>Period<\/th><th>Main Constitutional Position<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Phase I<\/td><td>1951\u20131967<\/td><td>Parliamentary Supremacy<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Phase II<\/td><td>1967\u20131973<\/td><td>Judicial Supremacy<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Phase III<\/td><td>1973<\/td><td>Formation of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"phase-one-parliamentary-supremacy\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Phase_I_%E2%80%93_Parliamentary_Supremacy_Phase_1951%E2%80%931967\"><\/span>Phase I \u2013 Parliamentary Supremacy Phase (1951\u20131967)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In this phase, the Supreme Court supported Parliament\u2019s power to amend Fundamental Rights under Article 368. During this period, more importance was given to parliamentary supremacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"shankari-prasad-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Shankari_Prasad_v_Union_of_India\"><\/span>Shankari Prasad v. Union of India<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>In Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that Parliament has the power to amend Fundamental Rights. This was the first important case which started the debate between constitutional supremacy and parliamentary supremacy. The Court also stated that constitutional amendments are not included within the meaning of \u201claw\u201d under Article 13.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"sajjan-singh-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Sajjan_Singh_v_State_of_Rajasthan\"><\/span>Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Similarly, in Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court again supported Parliament\u2019s power to amend Fundamental Rights by following the earlier judgment of the Shankari Prasad case. However, some judges raised concern regarding unlimited amendment powers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Parliament\u2019s amendment power was upheld.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Fundamental Rights could be amended.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Judicial concern regarding unlimited powers started emerging.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"phase-two-judicial-supremacy\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Phase_II_%E2%80%93_Judicial_Supremacy_Phase_1967%E2%80%931973\"><\/span>Phase II \u2013 Judicial Supremacy Phase (1967\u20131973)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In this phase, the Supreme Court changed its earlier view and gave more importance to Fundamental Rights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"golak-nath-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Golak_Nath_v_State_of_Punjab\"><\/span>Golak Nath v. State of Punjab<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>In Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court by a thin majority of 6:5 held that constitutional amendments under Article 368 come within the meaning of \u201claw\u201d under Article 13 of the Constitution. The Court also held that Article 368 only explains the procedure for amendment and does not give unlimited power to Parliament.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court further held that Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution. Any amendment violating Fundamental Rights would be declared void.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>After this judgment, conflict between Parliament and judiciary increased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Article 368 was treated as procedural in nature.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Fundamental Rights were given greater protection.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Judicial supremacy became more prominent.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"phase-three-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Phase_III_%E2%80%93_Formation_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine_1973\"><\/span>Phase III \u2013 Formation of the Basic Structure Doctrine (1973)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Basic Structure Doctrine was formed in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. This case is considered one of the most important judgments in Indian constitutional law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"kesavananda-bharati-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Kesavananda_Bharati_v_State_of_Kerala\"><\/span>Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court by a narrow hairline majority of 7:6 held that Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution under Article 368. However, Parliament cannot destroy or alter the basic structure of the Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This judgment introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine and created a balance between parliamentary supremacy and constitutional supremacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"importance-of-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Importance_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\"><\/span>Importance of the Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Protects the identity of the Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Prevents arbitrary constitutional amendments.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Preserves democracy and rule of law.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Maintains judicial review and constitutional supremacy.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Creates balance between Parliament and judiciary.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"key-features-protected-under-basic-structure\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Features_Protected_Under_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\"><\/span>Key Features Protected Under the Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Basic Feature<\/th><th>Purpose<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Constitutional Supremacy<\/td><td>Ensures the Constitution remains the supreme law.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Democracy<\/td><td>Protects democratic governance and free elections.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Judicial Review<\/td><td>Allows courts to review unconstitutional laws.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Secularism<\/td><td>Maintains equal treatment of all religions.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Rule of Law<\/td><td>Ensures equality before law and legal accountability.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"landmark-judgments-on-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Landmark_Judgments_on_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\"><\/span>Landmark Judgments on Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Basic Structure Doctrine is one of the most significant principles in Indian constitutional law. Through several landmark judgments, the Supreme Court of India clarified the scope of Parliament\u2019s amending powers under Article 368 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"kesavananda-bharati-v-state-of-kerala-1973\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Kesavananda_Bharati_v_State_of_Kerala_1973\"><\/span>Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"facts-of-kesavananda-bharati-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Facts\"><\/span>Facts<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Kesavananda Bharati was the petitioner in this case. He was the head of Edneer Mutt, a religious institution in Kasaragod, Kerala. The petitioner owned around 300 acres of land. The Kerala Government attempted to acquire this land by passing the Kerala Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1969.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Kesavananda Bharati filed a petition before the Supreme Court on 21 March 1970 under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of his Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19(1)(f), 25, 26 and 31 of the Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"issue-in-kesavananda-bharati-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Issue\"><\/span>Issue<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The main issue before the Court was whether Parliament has unlimited power to amend any part of the Constitution under Article 368.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"judgment-in-kesavananda-bharati-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Judgment\"><\/span>Judgment<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court, by a narrow majority of 7:6 in a 13-judge bench, held that Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights under Part III. However, Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in such a manner that destroys its basic structure or essential features.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"importance-of-kesavananda-bharati-case\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Importance\"><\/span>Importance<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>This judgment introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine and created a balance between parliamentary supremacy and constitutional supremacy. It is considered one of the most important judgments in Indian constitutional law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Particulars<\/th><th>Details<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Case Name<\/td><td>Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Main Issue<\/td><td>Extent of Parliament\u2019s power to amend the Constitution<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Key Principle<\/td><td>Introduction of the Basic Structure Doctrine<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Bench Strength<\/td><td>13 Judges<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"minerva-mills-v-union-of-india-1980\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Minerva_Mills_v_Union_of_India_1980\"><\/span>Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>In this landmark case, the Supreme Court further strengthened and evolved the Basic Structure Doctrine. The Court held that Parliament\u2019s amending power under Article 368 is not unlimited. The judgment also maintained a balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The Court further stated that judicial review and limited amending power are part of the basic structure of the Constitution. This case strengthened constitutional supremacy and limited arbitrary amendments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Key Aspect<\/th><th>Explanation<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Judicial Review<\/td><td>Declared as part of the basic structure<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Amending Power<\/td><td>Parliament\u2019s power under Article 368 is limited<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Constitutional Balance<\/td><td>Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"indira-nehru-gandhi-v-raj-narain-1975\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Indira_Nehru_Gandhi_v_Raj_Narain_1975\"><\/span>Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>This was an important case where the Supreme Court identified free and fair elections as part of the basic structure of the Constitution. The Court also emphasized judicial review and democratic principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The judgment held that Parliament cannot destroy these essential democratic features through constitutional amendments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Free and fair elections are part of the basic structure.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Judicial review is an essential constitutional feature.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Democratic principles cannot be destroyed through amendments.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"sr-bommai-v-union-of-india-1994\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"SR_Bommai_v_Union_of_India_1994\"><\/span>S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>This landmark judgment explained the scope and limitations of Article 356 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court identified secularism and federalism as essential features of the basic structure of the Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The case also strengthened constitutional morality and limited misuse of President\u2019s Rule by the Central Government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Constitutional Principle<\/th><th>Recognition by the Court<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Secularism<\/td><td>Declared part of the basic structure<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Federalism<\/td><td>Recognized as an essential constitutional feature<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Article 356<\/td><td>Limited arbitrary misuse of President\u2019s Rule<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"elements-of-basic-structure\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Elements_of_Basic_Structure\"><\/span>Elements of Basic Structure<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Supreme Court has identified various elements as part of the basic structure of the Constitution through different landmark judgments. Some important elements are discussed below:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"constitutional-principles\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Constitutional_Principles\"><\/span>Constitutional Principles<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Supremacy of the Constitution<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Rule of Law<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Separation of Powers<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Judicial Review<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"democratic-principles\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Democratic_Principles\"><\/span>Democratic Principles<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Republican and Democratic Form of Government<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Free and Fair Elections<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Parliamentary Democracy<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"federal-and-secular-principles\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Federal_and_Secular_Principles\"><\/span>Federal and Secular Principles<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Federalism<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Secularism<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Unity and Integrity of the Nation<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"rights-and-judicial-protection\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Rights_and_Judicial_Protection\"><\/span>Rights and Judicial Protection<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Independence of Judiciary<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Dignity of Individual<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"expansion-of-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Expansion_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\"><\/span>Expansion of the Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Most of these elements were mainly recognised in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), while later judgments such as Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), and S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) further expanded the scope of the doctrine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"evaluation-of-the-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Evaluation_of_the_Doctrine\"><\/span>Evaluation of the Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Basic Structure Doctrine is one of the most important judicial principles in Indian constitutional law. It safeguards the identity of the Constitution and limits the misuse of Parliament\u2019s amending powers under Article 368.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"positive-evaluation\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Positive_Evaluation\"><\/span>Positive Evaluation<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>The doctrine has played a significant role in preserving constitutional values, democracy, and the rule of law in India.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Basic Structure Doctrine protects the basic principles of democracy and ensures that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the country.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It prevents Parliament from overusing its amending powers under Article 368 and stops amendments which may destroy the basic character of the Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The doctrine protects the rights of individuals and helps in maintaining a balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It strengthened important constitutional concepts such as judicial review, federalism, secularism, and free and fair elections.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The doctrine protects the constitutional identity of India and ensures constitutional supremacy throughout the country.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"key-benefits-of-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Benefits_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine\"><\/span>Key Benefits of the Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Area<\/th><th>Protection Offered<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Democracy<\/td><td>Protects democratic governance and constitutional values.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Judicial Review<\/td><td>Ensures courts can examine unconstitutional amendments.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Federalism<\/td><td>Maintains the balance between the Centre and the States.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Fundamental Rights<\/td><td>Protects citizens from arbitrary constitutional amendments.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Constitutional Supremacy<\/td><td>Ensures that the Constitution remains the highest law of the land.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"criticism-of-the-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Criticism_of_the_Doctrine\"><\/span>Criticism of the Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Despite its importance, the doctrine has also faced criticism from constitutional scholars and political thinkers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Constitution does not clearly define the term \u201cbasic structure,\u201d which creates confusion regarding its exact meaning.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Critics argue that the doctrine is a result of judicial activism because it was created by the judiciary and not expressly mentioned in the Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Some critics believe that the doctrine violates the principle of separation of powers because the judiciary interferes in the amendment powers of Parliament.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It places certain restrictions and limitations on elected lawmakers while exercising constitutional amendment powers.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The Supreme Court has not provided a fixed list of elements forming the basic structure, and new elements have been identified by judges in different cases from time to time.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"major-criticisms-at-a-glance\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Major_Criticisms_at_a_Glance\"><\/span>Major Criticisms at a Glance<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Criticism<\/th><th>Explanation<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Lack of Definition<\/td><td>The Constitution does not specifically define \u201cbasic structure.\u201d<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Judicial Activism<\/td><td>The doctrine was evolved by the judiciary through case law.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Restriction on Parliament<\/td><td>Limits Parliament\u2019s constitutional amendment powers.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Uncertainty<\/td><td>No fixed list of basic structure elements exists.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Separation of Powers Debate<\/td><td>Some believe the judiciary interferes with legislative functions.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"significance-of-the-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Significance_of_the_Doctrine\"><\/span>Significance of the Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Doctrine of Basic Structure plays a vital role in maintaining constitutional supremacy and protecting the rights of individuals. It helps in preserving the spirit and identity of the Indian Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The doctrine ensures a balance between different organs of government such as Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>It ensures that Parliament acts in accordance with the provisions and principles of the Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The doctrine preserves the core structure, values, and identity of the Constitution.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>It protects important constitutional principles such as democracy, judicial review, secularism, and federalism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The doctrine also helps in ensuring that citizens enjoy their Fundamental Rights and constitutional protections.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"importance-of-basic-structure-doctrine\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Importance_of_the_Basic_Structure_Doctrine-2\"><\/span>Importance of the Basic Structure Doctrine<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Constitutional Principle<\/th><th>Role of the Doctrine<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Rule of Law<\/td><td>Prevents arbitrary constitutional amendments.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Democracy<\/td><td>Protects democratic governance and elections.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Judicial Review<\/td><td>Allows courts to review unconstitutional laws and amendments.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Secularism<\/td><td>Maintains religious neutrality of the State.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Federalism<\/td><td>Preserves the federal balance between Union and States.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"conclusion\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Conclusion\"><\/span>Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The Basic Structure Doctrine is one of the most valuable principles in the history of Indian constitutional law. It protects the basic values and identity of the Constitution from arbitrary amendments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Through various landmark judgments, the Supreme Court clarified that Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, but it cannot destroy or alter its basic structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Important elements such as rule of law, supremacy of the Constitution, federalism, secularism, judicial review, and separation of powers play an important role in preserving the spirit of the Indian Constitution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Over time, the Supreme Court has identified new elements of the basic structure through different landmark judgments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"references\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"References\"><\/span>References<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"books\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Books\"><\/span>Books<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>P. Jain, <em>Indian Constitutional Law<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>N. Shukla, <em>Constitution of India<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>D. Basu, <em>Introduction to the Constitution of India<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Laxmikanth, <em>Indian Polity<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"case-laws\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Case_Laws\"><\/span>Case Laws<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><em>Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala<\/em> (1973)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Minerva Mills v. Union of India<\/em> (1980)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain<\/em> (1975)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>S.R. Bommai v. Union of India<\/em> (1994)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Golak Nath v. State of Punjab<\/em> (1967)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Shankari Prasad v. Union of India<\/em> (1951)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><em>Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan<\/em> (1965)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\" id=\"websites\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Websites\"><\/span>Websites<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Indian Kanoon \u2013 https:\/\/indiankanoon.org<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>SCC Online \u2013 https:\/\/www.scconline.com<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Legal Service India \u2013 <a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\">https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Manupatra \u2013 https:\/\/www.manupatrafast.com<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Written By: Shaik Ameer<\/strong>, BBA LL.B- 4thYear &#8211; DR. Ambedkar Global Law Institute<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Introduction The Constitution of India is one of the most detailed and progressive written Constitutions in the world. It defines the powers of different organs of government and also protects the fundamental rights and duties of citizens. Article 368 of the Indian Constitution grants Parliament the power to amend the Constitution according to the changing<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1499,"featured_media":24607,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[775,28],"class_list":{"0":"post-24608","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-constitutional-law","8":"tag-constitutional-law","9":"tag-top-news"},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/ChatGPT-Image-May-17-2026-08_05_40-PM.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24608","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1499"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24608"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24608\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":24643,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24608\/revisions\/24643"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/24607"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24608"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24608"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24608"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}