Constitutional Law: From Kesavananda to Kiren Rijiju

**Unpacking the Doctrine of Basic Structure in the Indian Polity** Hey there, law students! If you're preparing for CUET PG Law, you're probably well-versed with the basics of Constitutional Law. But today, I want to dive deeper into one of the most fascinating topics – the Doctrine of Basic Structure. This concept has been a cornerstone of Indian Constitutional Law, ever since the historic Kesavananda Bharati case.

The Kesavananda Bharati Case: A Landmark Judgment

In 1973, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. The case involved the constitutional validity of the 24th Amendment to the Indian Constitution, which sought to limit the power of the judiciary to amend the Constitution. The Court, led by Chief Justice S.M. Sikri, held that the Parliament could not amend the basic features of the Constitution, and this led to the evolution of the Doctrine of Basic Structure.

So, what exactly is the Doctrine of Basic Structure? Simply put, it means that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered or amended by the Parliament or the State Legislatures. These features include the principles of democracy, socialism, secularism, and the rule of law.

The Basic Structure: A Living Document

The Doctrine of Basic Structure has been applied in various cases, including the Minerva Mills case (1980), where the Supreme Court held that the Parliament could not amend the Constitution to limit the power of judicial review. In more recent times, the Court has applied this doctrine in cases like Keshavananda Bharati's (son) case in 2000 and in the case of Kuldip Nayar v. Union of India in 2006.

But here's the thing – the Basic Structure is not a static concept. It's a living document that has evolved over time, and it continues to adapt to the changing needs of the Indian polity. In 2015, the Supreme Court, in the case of I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, held that the Basic Structure includes not only the text of the Constitution but also the principles and values that underlie it.

Challenges to the Doctrine: A Debate in Progress **The Kiren Rijiju Conundrum: A Challenge to the Doctrine of Basic Structure** In recent years, the debate around the Doctrine of Basic Structure has heated up, with some arguing that it's an impediment to judicial overreach. In 2019, former Union Law Minister Kiren Rijiju sparked a controversy by questioning the validity of the Doctrine. He argued that the Supreme Court had overstepped its bounds in applying this doctrine to cases involving the Parliament and the State Legislatures.

While Rijiju's comments were widely criticized by the legal fraternity, they did raise an important question – is the Doctrine of Basic Structure still relevant in today's India? Some argue that it's a relic of the past, and that the Constitution has evolved to become a more flexible and dynamic document. Others argue that the Doctrine is still essential to protecting the fundamental rights and values enshrined in the Constitution.