Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

27. The learned counsel relied on His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripad-galvaru v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461; Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 1789; Babhutmal Raichand Oswal v. Laxmibai R. Tarte, AIR 1975 SC 1297, A. K. Roy v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 710 and Parkash Singh Badal v. Union of India, AIR 1987 Punj & Har 263 (FB) : As submitted by the counsel for the petitioners the conspectus of the precedents relied is that the power to amend the Constitution envisaged by Article 368 is unlimited with exception of Articles effecting the basic structure. The Indian people have built the Union on the concept of sovereignty of the people. Every provision of the Constitution is basically essential and forms the basic foundations of the structure of the Constitution. It consists of features like supermacy of Constitution, republican and democratic form of Government, secular character of Constitution; separation of powers between Legislative, Executive, Judiciary and the federal character of the Constitution as they emerge from the Scheme and the preamble of the Constitution. The integrity of the country, dignity and freedom of individuals are of supreme importance. It is in the interest of the integrity and security of the country that certain rights can be suspended, though the Fundamental Rights are inalienable and incapable of being vague and violated. Further the Constitution follows the preamble as Preamble came into force on November 26, 1949 and the Constitution on January 26, 1950. The Preamble is a part of the Constitution. It assures the people of a polity whose basic structure as described is sovereign, democratic republican. The Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot destroy it. India's sovereignty and its democratic republic character and other essential attributes of the concept of Constitution have been described in the Preamble. It assures fraternity and dignity of the individual and the unity of the Nation. The Parliament cannot abrogate democracy. It cannot deprive people of free democracy and lay foundation of the authoritarian State. It was pointed out that basic structures, essential , features of the Constitution referred to in Kesavananda Bharati's case (AIR 1973 SC 1461) (supra) are merely illustrative and not exhaustive. Democracy was declared to be an essential feature forming part of the basic structure of the Constitution. It has been laid down that in every case where the question arises as to whether a particular feature of the Constitution is part of the basic structure or not. It has to be determined by taking into consideration various factors such as the basic scheme of the Constitution, its object and purpose, consequential denial of integrity of the Constitution or any fundamental institution of the country etc.

28. It was fairly laid down that any provision of any Constitutional emendment which damages, abrogates or destroys the basic structure of the Constitution would be invalid to that extent. In Prakash Singh Badal's case (AIR 1987 Punj & Har 263) (FB) (supra), it was observed that free and fair voting is a minimum basic and essential attribute of democracy, thus a component part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

29. There can be no dispute with the law laid down by the judgments cited by the counsel for the petitioners. The principle discernible from them and sanguinely pressed is that 'democracy' and 'federal structure' are part of the basic structure and essential features of our written Constitution.

30. The counsel for the respondents did not dispute the said proposition, rather the counsel for the parties proceeded with the arguments on the assumption that democracy and federal structure are part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

31. Contentions of the petitioners with respect to vires of 64th amendment have also been noticed in the earlier part of the judgment.

32. Violation of basic structure of the Constitution by 64th amendment was refuted. It was urged that neither it abrogates nor destroys the basic structure of the Constitution. It was urged that power of imposition of President Rule under Article 356 was part of the Constitution as originally framed and enlarging its duration would not affect its basic structure.

48. As it was observed in Mrs. Sajida Begum's case (AIR 1977 SC 1361) (supra) that right to be a member of an Assembly is not a Fundamental Right. Similarly, mechanism for electing legislative Assembly or Parliament for governing themselves is a statutory process which can be varied according to the situation, time and circumstances by a statute. Every change brought about in the statutory rights would not intefere with the basic structure of the Constitution. It is well established that right to vote, to be a member of Assembly or Parliament is neither a Fundamental Right nor a natural right nor common law right, nor it is an action at law or suit in equity but is purely a statutory proceedings unknown to common law and Court possesses no common law power. In a democratic polity election to Assemblies or the Parliament is a mechanism devised to reflect the true wishes and the will of the people in the matter of choosing persons as their political managers for governance. The representatives either to the State Assembly or to the Parliament are to echo the view of their sovereigns whom they represent. Our Constitution ensures that the people govern themselves in accordance with the Constitution given by them to themselves. Mere eclipsing one of the two institutions of Government, i.e. the Centre and the State for a temporary period in view of the Emergency or failure on the part of the State Government to govern according to the Constitution does not wipe out or abridge the basic structure of the Constitution. Rule by the Centre is also a rule by the elected representatives. In our considered view 64th amendment neither affects the federal structure of the Constitution nor destroys the democratic process. Even while the State Assembly is kept in abeyance, the State is run by democratically elected representatives of the people viz., the members of Parliament. The Parliament while discharging the functions of making laws provided in the State list in fact discharges the functions of State Legislature. The Parliament is conferred with dual character during the President Rule. We fail to understand how democracy has been alienated by imposition of the President Rule. Deferment of the election does not obliterate the democracy Sixty fourth amendment does not violate the basic structure of the Constitution so as to be declared ultra vires of the Constitution.