The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case (1973) is one of the most important constitutional cases in Indian legal history. It established the Basic Structure Doctrine. Key facts about the case: Background: Swami Kesavananda Bharati, head of a religious mutt in Kerala, challenged land reform laws enacted by the Kerala government that affected the mutt's property. The challenge was under Article 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) and other constitutional rights. Issue: Whether Parliament had unlimited power to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, under Article 368. Judgment: The Supreme Court, in a 7-6 majority, held that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights. However, it cannot alter or destroy the "basic structure" of the Constitution. The “basic structure” includes principles like: Supremacy of the Constitution Rule of law Separation of powers Judicial review Fundamental Rights Secularism Democracy Impact: This case limited the amending power of Parliament, protecting the core values of the Constitution. It preserved judicial review as a safeguard against constitutional abuse. It remains a landmark case upholding constitutional integrity and democracy in India.

Dear Client, In the history of the Indian judiciary the Kesavananda Bharati case is preeminent and very famous. In 1973 it put forth the “Basic Structure Doctrine” of the Indian Constitution. Background Swami Kesavananda Bharati put forth the case which came about from a petition he presented as head of a Hindu monastic system in Kerala. He challenged a state government bill which put out the Kerala Land Reforms Act that which tried to put in place regulations for his monastery’s assets. The case at first was a issue of right to property and right to run religious affairs. Does the Parliament have the right to amend any part of the Constitution which includes Fundamental Rights? This issue was a history of conflict between the judiciary and Parliament. At that time the government put forth to pass constitutional amendments (the 24th, 25th, and 29th) which some saw as an attempt to reduce judicial power and break fundamental rights. The Judgment and the Fundamental Structure Principle. In the 6th verdict it was determined that which the Parliament has the right to change the Constitution this right is not unlimited. The Court put forth the Basic Structure Doctrine which notes that Parliament’s power to amend as outlined in Article 368 does not include changes to the “basic structure” or the “essential features” of the Constitution. While the court did not present a conclusive definition of what makes up the “basic structure” it did put forth some features that have been built upon in later rulings. These include: The supremacy of the Constitution. Republican and Democratic forms of government. The secular character of the Constitution. The tripartite division of powers between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. Federalism. Sure, please provide the text that you would like me to paraphrase. The independence of the judiciary. The provision for judicial review. Significance In many ways the Kesavananda Bharati case is a landmark. Limited Parliamentary Power: It put in place a structure which which did not allow the Parliament to bring in changes that would in fact change the democratic and federal character of India. Judicial Review: It established the judiciary’s role as that of the ultimate interpreter and guardian of the Constitution which in turn gave it the power to nullify constitutional amendments which go against the basic structure. Protection of Fundamental Rights: It made sure that basic rights and other key constitutional principles are not at the mercy of a transient legislative majority. In that which played out the issue was to put into practice the principle of checks and balance which in turn proved that the structure of the Constitution is unchangeable and we which in turn protected the health of India’s democratic structure. I hope this response does what you need. Should you still have issues, please do not hesitate to ask. Thank you.