Landmark judgments

Introduction

  1. Landmark judgments play a pivotal role in interpreting and safeguarding Fundamental Rights.
  2. Two such landmark cases are the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) and the Maneka Gandhi case (1978).
  3. These judgments have shaped the constitutional and legal framework of India.

Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)

  1. Full Name: Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala.
  2. This case arose from a challenge to the Kerala Land Reforms Act of 1969.
  3. The petitioner argued that the act violated his Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 19, and 31.
  4. The case was heard by a 13-judge bench of the Supreme Court, the largest in Indian judicial history.
  5. The key issue was whether the Parliament had unlimited power to amend the Constitution under Article 368.
  6. The Court upheld the Basic Structure Doctrine, stating that Parliament could not amend the basic structure of the Constitution.
  7. The ruling identified several components of the basic structure, including:
    • Sovereignty and democratic nature of the polity.
    • Secularism and federalism.
    • Judicial review and the separation of powers.
    • Unity and integrity of the nation.
  8. The judgment preserved the supremacy of the Constitution and limited the powers of Parliament.
  9. This case is a cornerstone of Indian constitutional law and strengthens the protection of Fundamental Rights.

Maneka Gandhi Case (1978)

  1. Full Name: Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India.
  2. The case was initiated when the Government of India impounded Maneka Gandhi’s passport without providing reasons.
  3. The petitioner challenged this action under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.
  4. The key issue was whether the procedure followed to impound the passport violated her right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
  5. The Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21, stating that the procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable.
  6. The judgment established a close connection between Articles 14 (Equality before the law), 19 (Freedoms), and 21 (Life and liberty).
  7. The Court declared that the law must pass the test of:
    • Reasonableness under Article 14.
    • Substantial freedoms under Article 19.
    • Fair procedure under Article 21.
  8. The judgment expanded the scope of Article 21 to include various rights such as:
    • Right to travel abroad.
    • Right to live with dignity.
    • Right to privacy.
    • Right to education.
  9. The judgment enhanced the accountability of the executive and strengthened the protection of Fundamental Rights.

Significance of These Judgments

  1. Both cases reinforced the supremacy of the Constitution over legislative and executive actions.
  2. The Kesavananda Bharati case introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine, limiting the amending power of Parliament.
  3. The Maneka Gandhi case expanded the scope of Article 21 and interlinked it with Articles 14 and 19.
  4. These judgments underscore the judiciary's role in protecting Fundamental Rights and the democratic framework of India.
  5. They have served as precedents for numerous subsequent cases involving constitutional rights.

Conclusion

The Kesavananda Bharati and Maneka Gandhi judgments are milestones in Indian constitutional history. They not only safeguarded Fundamental Rights but also established principles that continue to guide the interpretation of the Constitution. These cases highlight the dynamic nature of constitutional law and its role in ensuring justice and liberty for all.

Category
Fundamental Rights
Indian Polity and Governance
Which landmark case introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine?
The Kesavananda Bharati case was decided in which year?
What was the primary issue in the Kesavananda Bharati case?
Which Fundamental Right was interpreted in the Maneka Gandhi case?
The Basic Structure Doctrine limits the powers of:
In the Maneka Gandhi case, which article was interpreted expansively?
What was the main focus of the Maneka Gandhi case?
The Kesavananda Bharati case was heard by how many judges in the Supreme Court?
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment upheld the validity of which constitutional amendment?
The Maneka Gandhi case emphasized the importance of:
The Kesavananda Bharati case was primarily related to:
Which Fundamental Right was curtailed in the Maneka Gandhi passport confiscation case?
The majority opinion in the Kesavananda Bharati case ruled that:
Which judge presided over the Kesavananda Bharati case?
The Maneka Gandhi case expanded the scope of Article 21 to include:
Which principle emerged as a result of the Kesavananda Bharati case?
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment ruled that amendments violating the Constitution's basic structure are:
The Maneka Gandhi case interpreted Article 21 in conjunction with:
The 42nd Amendment was partially invalidated based on the Kesavananda Bharati judgment for violating:
The Kesavananda Bharati case primarily dealt with which part of the Constitution?
In the Maneka Gandhi case, the Supreme Court held that "procedure established by law" must be:
The Maneka Gandhi judgment was delivered in which year?
Which Fundamental Right was upheld as inviolable in the Kesavananda Bharati case?
The Maneka Gandhi case strengthened which doctrine in Indian constitutional law?
Which constitutional body was indirectly affected by the Kesavananda Bharati judgment?
The Maneka Gandhi case established a link between which Fundamental Rights?
What triggered the Kesavananda Bharati case?
The Maneka Gandhi judgment introduced which principle to Indian jurisprudence?
The Kesavananda Bharati case defined the scope of Parliament's powers under:
The Maneka Gandhi case expanded the interpretation of which concept?
The Kesavananda Bharati judgment highlighted the interplay between:
The Maneka Gandhi case arose due to the denial of:
The Basic Structure Doctrine prevents Parliament from: