Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala

On April 24, 1973, the Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala case was decided by the Indian Supreme Court. This landmark case is considered one of the most important in India’s constitutional history, as it shaped the way that the Indian Constitution is interpreted. The main petitioner, in this case, was Kesavananda Bharati, a religious leader, and philosopher who argued that the Indian Constitution should be interpreted as a static document, rather than a living one. In this article, important points from the petition are also dealt with. The petition raised several important points about the nature of India’s democracy and its relationship with religion.

What was the Kesavananda Bharati case?

The main petitioner, Kesavananda Bharati filed a writ petition challenging the Kerala Land Reforms Act. The main points of the petition were that the Act violated the rights of property owners and went against the principles of equality and justice. The case was heard by a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which ruled in favor of Kesavananda Bharati. The main points of the ruling were that the Parliament could not amend the Constitution in a way that would destroy its basic structure. This ruling has been cited in many subsequent cases and is considered to be one of the most important judgments in Indian legal history.

Facts of Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala

The main petitioner, Kesavananda Bharti was the chief of a religious sect of Edneer Mutt in Kerala. Kesavananda Bharati had certain land areas of the sect in his name. There were some disputes between the state government and the sect members over the ownership of these lands. The state government of Kerala introduced the Land Reforms Amendment Act, 1969 under which the state government had the right to take some parts of the land which belonged to the case.

Kesavananda Bharati moved to the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Indian constitution for the infringement of his fundamental rights under Article 25 (Right to practice and propagate religion) and Article 26 (Right to manage religious affairs), Article 14 ( Right to Equality), Article 31 (compulsory acquisition of property) and Article 19(1)(f) (freedom to acquire property).

When the matter was still pending in the court the Kerala government passed another act called Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1971. In the case of Golaknath vs  the State of Punjab, certain amendments were made like the 24th Constitutional (Amendment), Act 1971, which states that Parliament has the power to amend the provisions of the constitution. The 25th Constitutional (Amendment) Act states that if the state government takes private property it’s not the responsibility of the state to compensate the owner equally.

Issues raised in this case

Firstly, Is there any constitutional validity of the 24th Constitutional (Amendment) and the 25th Constitutional (Amendment)? Secondly, whether the Parliament can amend the constitution or not?

Judgment of the Case

In the case of Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala, it was held by the Supreme Court that the Parliament has the right to change the provision of the constitution but it shall not change the basic structure of the Indian constitution. The majority bench held that the basic structure of the constitution, meaning thereby the true essence of the constitution, shall be changed by the Parliament under Article 368 of the constitution of India. Thus, the 24th Amendment Act was completely upheld by the court and two parts of the 25th Amendment were found ultra and intra-vires.

The Doctrine of Basic Structure:

According to the doctrine, the Parliament has all the power to change the basic structure of the constitution but keeping in mind that the basic structure of the constitution shall not be amended in any case. It further states that, if the basic structure of the constitution is amended, the true nature and essence of the constitution will be lost and it will be left spiritless. The term basic structure was not defined by the bench in this case rather it was left on the court to do the interpretation.

Conclusion

The Kesavananda Bharati v/s State of Kerala case is an important case under Indian constitutional law. It is considered to be one of the most important cases in Indian history, as it helped to define the relationship between the central government and the states. The outcome of the case also helped to protect India’s federal structure. In addition, the Kesavananda Bharati versus State of Kerala case set some important precedents for constitutional interpretation. This case is an important part of Indian legal history and should be studied by all students who are interested in this topic.