AIR 1975 SC 2299
Introduction
After the Keshvanand Bharti case, this case had a great impact on Indian politics. It was the first time in Independent India’s history that a prime minister’s election was set aside, which created a huge effect on the judicial system of our country.
It was then that the doctrine of Basic Structure laid out in the Keshvanand Bharti case was applied, and a constitutional amendment was struck down on the basis.
Fact
- Mrs. Indira Gandhi won the election from Rai Bareilly constituency in 1971 with a huge number of votes in her favor.
- After the results, Raj Narain filed a petition before the Allahabad High Court and accused Smt. Gandhi of using malpractices during the election.
- The High Court of Allahabad gave the decision in favor of Raj Narain and declared Smt. Gandhi guilty of corrupt practice in the election.
- Smt. Indira Gandhi made an appeal before the Supreme Court against the decision of the Allahabad High Court.
- At the meantime Honourable President, Mr. Fakhrudeen Ali Ahmad declared a national emergency for the reason of “internal disturbances” as provided under Article 356 of the Constitution of India.
- Surprisingly, only a day before the date of hearing of the case, the President passed the Constitution’s 39th Amendment Act, 1975 by inserting Article 329-A.
- As per the newly inserted Article in the Constitution, the Supreme Court was absolutely barred from entertaining the matters which was relating to the elections of the President, Prime Minister, Vice-President, and Speaker of Lok Sabha.
Legal Issues
Whether or not Clause (4) of Article 329-A, introduced by the 39th Amendment Act, 1975, was constitutionally valid?
Arguments of the Parties
The constitutional validity of Article 329-A was challenged on the following grounds:
- This Article destroyed the basic features and basic structure of the Constitution as laid down in Keshvanand Bharati v. State of Kerala.
- The jurisdiction of judiciary is taken away by the Article 329-A, and, therefore, the democratic character of the Constitution is demolished.
- The amendment destroyed the principle of equality.
- The rule of law is the basis for democracy and judicial review and the same cannot be taken away.
- The condition of the House that passed this amendment was illegal, as they passed this bill in a time of emergency.
- Many Parliament members of the two Houses were arrested by the order of executive without being given any proper reason or representation.
Judgement
The 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Raj Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh and struck down the Article 329A of 39th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1975 is against the Rule of Law and against Principle of Natural Justice
SC held that the amendment violated “free and fair elections (democracy) and judicial review.
Justice Chandrachud, in Indira Gandhi case said, this judgement took the opportunity to expand the scope of basic structure by identifying 4 basic features:
1. Sovereign democratic republic status
2. Equality
3. Secularism, Freedom of conscience and religion
4. Government of laws, not of men
Conclusion
The separation of power is an important doctrine applied in the Indian scenario. The feature ensures the independence of the judiciary, making it more accountable and free from bias. If the power of the judiciary is reduced by the Articles like 329-A, it would destroy the democratic character of our society. Along with the independence of the judiciary, separation of powers also came under the preview of judicial review.
The makers of the Indian Constitution put the characteristic of free and fair elections, which are an essential feature of democracy,
The Court said that the Amendment violated the principle of separation of power and the principle of natural justice as enshrined in ‘audi alteram partem’ as it denied the right of a fair hearing to the person challenging an election. Thus, the Court struck down the 39th Constitutional Amendment and applied all laws and principles appropriately.
The Court delivered its judgment while an emergency was in force and fundamental rights were suspended. The learned bench upheld the essentials, characteristics, and basic structure of fundamental rights so that no organ or law can be above the Rule of Law.
Youtube facebook whatsapp web weather translate google amazon gmail google translate Instagram cricbuzz traductor Hotmail restaurants satta king tiempo twitter googel maps Yandex Sarkari result clima hotels fb yahoo maps chatgpt yahoo mail weather tomorrow Netflix roblox nba wordle tradutor livescore premier league ibomma speed test canva pintrest outlook Instagram login omegle flipkart myntra paypal paytm Alibaba ebay lottery sambad linkedin tiktok shein bbc news real madrid gmail login Walmart ikea cricket snaptik flashscore English to hindi twitch google scholar Barcelona Sarkari Naukri matrimonial shadi lgbtq third gender woman children Advocate barrister vakil supreme court high court commissioner exams ll.b ll.m ugc net law ph.d. m.b.a. graduation degree certificate school additional session judge civil judge justice jurists crime criminology punishment capital sentence death warrant fine constitution of india criminal procedure code civil procedure code evidence act sale of goods act arbitration act all india bar exam lower judiciary higher judiciary additional district attorney contract act amendment act u.s. constitution Canada p r section article schedule judgment vacancy post Porsche louis Vuitton chanel Gucci Hermes dior cartier rolex titan tiffany & co Ferrari estee lauder coach lancome burberry prada omega yves saint Laurent Lamborghini ray-ban Armani Moncler tata reliance Givenchy celine Bentley tag Heuer sk-II can cleef & arpels bulgari Shangri-la lao feng xiang dabur baidyanath cipla birla monte carlo loewe rolls-royce bottega-veneta jaege-leCoulture Maserati valentino dolce & gabbana Salvatore Ferragamo sulwhasso tom ford Maruti Suzuki Hyundai kia intercontinental Tissot aston martin ysl beauty fendi Versace kenzo la mer longines gold price sensex human rights pollution