The Supreme Court of India enunciated the doctrine of "Basic Structure of the Constitution" in

Question

UnlockIAS · Accepted Answer

Correct — B, the Kesavananda Bharati case in 1973. In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court — the largest ever — held by a 7:6 majority that while Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution under Article 368, it cannot alter or destroy the Constitution's 'basic structure' (its essential features such as supremacy of the Constitution, rule of law, separation of powers, judicial review, federalism and secularism). This ruling first enunciated the Basic Structure doctrine, making (b) correct.

Why the other options are wrong — (a) Wrong — Golaknath (1967) held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, but it did NOT propound the basic-structure doctrine; that came later in Kesavananda, which also overruled Golaknath's position.  (c) Wrong — Shankari Prasad (1951) upheld Parliament's power to amend Fundamental Rights and imposed no basic-structure limit.  (d) Wrong — Sajjan Singh (1965) reaffirmed Shankari Prasad, again upholding the amending power without any basic-structure restraint.

Concept: The Basic Structure doctrine is a judge-made limit on Parliament's constituent power under Article 368. Its evolution runs Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965), which allowed amendment of Fundamental Rights; Golaknath (1967), which barred it; and finally Kesavananda Bharati (1973), which harmonised the two by ruling that Parliament may amend any provision but cannot damage the Constitution's essential framework. Later cases (Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain 1975, Minerva Mills 1980, Waman Rao 1981) developed the doctrine further.

State PCS 2020 Q120 — Polity & Governance PYQ with Answer

State PCS 2020 Q120 — Polity & Governance PYQ with Answer