Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
(1973) 4 SCC 225 · 13-judge bench (7:6 majority)
A Kerala land-reform law affecting a religious institution's property was challenged, but the case grew into a much bigger question: does Parliament's power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 have any limits at all?
By a razor-thin 7:6 majority, the Court held that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights — but cannot use that power to destroy or alter the Constitution's "basic structure" (core features like democracy, secularism, separation of powers, judicial review, and the rule of law).
This is arguably the single most important case in Indian constitutional history — the "Basic Structure Doctrine" it created is what stops Parliament from, say, amending away elections or the judiciary itself, even with the numbers to pass a constitutional amendment.
Related law
The amendment power this case placed a real, judicially-enforced limit on
Keep exploring
Minerva Mills v. Union of India
Confirmed and applied Kesavananda Bharati's basic structure doctrine to actually strike down a specific amendment — proving it wasn't just theoretical, and cementing judicial review as untouchable even by Parliament's amending power.
I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu
Reined in what had become a growing practice of using the Ninth Schedule to shield increasingly unrelated and controversial laws from any judicial scrutiny at all — see our Ninth Schedule page for the full detail.
This is a plain-English summary, not verbatim judgment text. Adhikar is an independent citizen-awareness platform, not a Government of India website. Always verify against the full judgment (indiankanoon.org, sci.gov.in) or a qualified advocate before relying on this for an actual legal situation.