Reconciling Constitutional Ideals: A Contemporary Reassessment of the Basic Structure Doctrine

Authors

  • Himgauri Patil Legal Consultant, Gujarat High Court, Ahmedabad, Gujarat Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69974/glskalp.05.02.03

Keywords:

Basic structure, Judicial Review, Constitution, Separation of Power, Independent Judiciary

Abstract

The Indian Constitution establishes a framework where no governmental organ is supreme, mandating that all operate within its boundaries. While the Constitution should provide explicit mechanisms for judicial review, the judiciary has, in exceptional cases, developed doctrines like the 'basic structure' to ensure constitutional supremacy. The absence of explicit limitations on parliamentary amendment power in Article 368 led to the Ninth Schedule's problematic expansion, prompting the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case to introduce the 'basic structure' doctrine, imposing implied limits. It emerged as a mechanism to impose limitations on Parliament's constituent power. However, the doctrine's ambiguity and lack of textual basis, coupled with the absence of clear criteria for its application, have raised concerns about judicial overreach and potential violations of the separation of powers. This paper examines the rationale behind the 'basic structure' doctrine, its composition, and its impact on the separation of powers. It also considers the need for explicit constitutional amendments to define the doctrine and address the risks associated with individual judicial interpretations. This paper examines the academic and historical origins of the doctrine, its evolution post-Kesavananda Bharati, and the constitutional and jurisprudential debates surrounding it in the contemporary era. The doctrine’s applicability to Parliament’s legislative authority, the precedential strength of Kesavananda Bharati under the doctrine of stare decisis, the concept of legislative overruling and its implications for constitutional governance, and the intersection of constitutional morality with the basic structure doctrine. These issues are integral to the broader discourse on separation of powers and judicial review. This paper critically engages with these themes, situating them within the present-day realities of India’s constitutional framework.

References

Shankari Prasad vs. Union of India (1951) Summary for UPSC Polity Notes - notes.saralupsc.com. https://notes.saralupsc.com/shankari-prasad-vs-union-of-india-1951-summary-for-upsc-polity-notes

judgments.ecourts.gov.in. (n.d.). The Basic Structure Judgment - Kesavananda Bharati Judgment - Home. https://judgments.ecourts.gov.in

Supreme Court Observer. (2023). Determination of Minority Status: Court in Review - Supreme Court Observer. [online] Available at: https://www.scobserver.in/journal/determination-of-minority-status-court-in-review

Constitutional Law and Philosophy. (2014). NALSA v. UoI: The Supreme Court on transsexuals, and the future of Koushal v. Naz. [online] Available at: https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com

Manupatracademy.com. (2025). Manupatra Academy. [online] https://www.manupatracademy.com

Khosla, M. (2016). Constitutional Amendment. [online] Ssrn.com.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA, https://api.sci.gov.in/supremecourt

Faizan, M., Venugopal, P., Rao Justice, Z., Yacoob Justice, B., Jeevan, R., Granville, A., Singh, M., Galanter, V., Sarathi, P., Craig, A. and Lakshminath

Archive.org. (2015). Full text of ‘Aadhaar Supreme Court Cases’

Supra 3

Sci.gov.in. (2024). Digital Supreme Court Reports. https://digiscr.sci.gov.in/view_judgment

Manupatra (2025). Articles – Manupatra. [online] Manupatra.com. https://articles.manupatra.com

View (2020). Referendums and the Indian Constitution. [online] The ‘Basic’ Structure.

https://thebasicstructureconlaw.wordpress.com

Supra 3

Supra 2

CHALLENGING THE BASIC STRUCTURE DOCTRINE: COMMENTS BY VICE-PRESIDENT DHANKAR (2023) Jus Corpus. [online] Jus Corpus., https://www.juscorpus.com/challenging-the-basic-structure-doctrine

Id

Trivedi, V. (n.d.). The doctrine of Legal Precedent: Analysing Sub-Silentio and Per Incuriam.

https://www.juscorpus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/45.-Vidhi-Trivedi.pdf.

Urofsky, M. (2018). Marbury v. Madison, Background, Summary, & Significance. In: Encyclopædia Britannica. [https://www.britannica.com

Rao, C.N.R. and Rao, K.J. (1967). Phase transformations in solids. Progress in Solid State Chemistry, [online] 4, pp.131–185.

Drishti IAS. (2024). 50 Years of Kesavananda Bharati Judgment. https://www.drishtiias.com

Justia Law. (n.d.). Texas v. White, 74 U.S. 700 (1868). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us

decisions.scc-csc.ca. (1998). Reference re Secession of Quebec - SCC Cases, https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/1643/index.do.

PMF IAS. (2023). Asymmetric Federalism in India. [online] Available at: https://www.pmfias.com/asymmetric-federalism

Supra 3

Downloads

Published

2025-04-06

How to Cite

Reconciling Constitutional Ideals: A Contemporary Reassessment of the Basic Structure Doctrine. (2025). GLS KALP: Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 5(2), 43-53. https://doi.org/10.69974/glskalp.05.02.03