Petitioner: Kesavananda Bharati and Ors Respondent: State of Kerala and Anr. Date of Judgement: 24/04/1973 Case No.: Writ Petition 135 of 1970 Bench: S.M. Sikri, K.S. Hegde, A.K. Mukherjea, J.M. Shelat, A.N. Grover, P. Jaganmohan Reddy, H.R. Khanna, A.N. Ray, K.K. Mathew, M.H. Beg, S.N. Dwivedi, & Y.V. Chandrachud.
Background of the case:
Before knowing about the facts and principles laid down in Keshavananda Bharti vs State of Kerala you must first know the background of the case and why this case is so special. It was first in 1967 in the Golaknath case which leads down the background for Keshavanand Bharti’s case.
It was the first time when the Supreme Court held that the state cannot amend the fundamental rights as mentioned in the constitution. This decision was with respect to article 13 and Article 368 of the constitution. From here, the Rival between the Supreme Court and the government started. After this, two major amendments took place during the Indira Gandhi government that is the 24th amendment and the 25th amendment, which stated that government can amend any part of the Constitution including fundamental rights and the government may acquire any property of any citizens.
Facts of the case:
Keshavanand Bharti was the senior head of Edneer Mutt in Kerala and he used to manage that place. Under the right enshrined under Article 26 of the Indian Constitution, he was managing the religious place.
Kerala government attempted to control the religiously owned property under the State Land Reforms Act. Keshavanand Bharti was directed by Nanabhoy Palkhivala that his right under article 26 is being infringed and he must approach the judiciary for infringement of article 26.
Judgment:
The case was first tried in the High court and then in the apex court. The 13 bench judges from ratio 7: 6 majority held that Parliament can amend any part of the constitution but the basic structure cannot be altered. This judgment was opposite to that of the 1967 Golaknath case. Also, it was held in this case that Preamble is part of the constitution.
The role of Indira Gandhi
The critical fact to be known related to the case is that ex-Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi introduced two major amendments in the Indian Constitution that is 39th and 41st amendments. The two key points of the amendments were that, if any person who has been the Prime Minister of India, then no civil or criminal cases can be framed against him, not even for a single day.
The Other amendment was that the term for President of India shall only be for 6 months to 1 year. The reason behind the introduction of such amendments was that Indira Gandhi wanted All Powers to be directed to the center. However, it couldn’t be fulfilled due to the judgment of Keshavananda Bharti’s case of 1973. The overwhelming
power on Prime Minister India is limited and he or she will be tried as a normal citizen if commits any civil or criminal wrong.
Despite this, Indira Gandhi didn’t stop here and after the judgment of the Keshavanand Bharti case, she promoted Justice Ray, as the Chief Justice of India. Justice Ray was one among the six minority judges voted against the Keshavananda Bharti’s case.
In 1975, Keshavananda Bharti’s case was tried again to open but it was Nanabhoy Palkhivala convinced the court that already the Supreme Court has given the judgment on the case and it cannot be reviewed again.
This case is one of the major landmarks in history as now no government can think of doing amendments related to the fundamental/basic structure of the Constitution. And today if we are enjoying all our fundamental rights freely we should give credit to this judgment also.
हिंदी में पढ़ें: केशवानन्द भारती बनाम केरल राज्य
