Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Smt. Indira Nehru Gandhi Vs. Shri Raj Narain and Anr.
AIR1975SC2299, 1975(Supp)SCC1, [1976]2SCR347
Hon’ble Judges/Coram: A.N. Ray, C.J., H.R. Khanna, K.K. Mathew, M. Hameedullah Beg and Y.V. Chandrachud, JJ.
Decided On: 07.11.1975
FACTS:-
Allahabad High Court gave a judgment invalidating the election of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi on the ground of her involvement in the corrupt practices at the time of the election. So, she filed an appeal before this court. Meanwhile, Parliament by exercising its Amendment Powers enacted 39th Constitutional Amendment Act to overcome/bypass the actual effect of the Judgment as pronounced by the Allahabad high Court. This Constitutional Amendment Act has the effect of withdrawing the Jurisdiction of all courts in matters concerning the election of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.
ISSUE:-
Whether clause (4) of the 39th Constitutional Amendment Act is valid or not?
JUDGMENT:-
The court observed that clause (4) is an outright negation of the right to equality as enshrined in the Article 14 (Part III) of the Indian Constitution. Right to equality is the basic postulate of the Indian Constitution as envisaged by the founding fathers of the Constitution.
Moreover, it is violating the provision of the Free and Fair election which is an essential and important part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution as laid down in the case of Keshavananda Bharti Case. The impugned clause excludes the power of judicial review in election disputes, thereby, resulting in the violation of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, by introducing “faire des élection efficaces et sécuritaires avec le vote électronique” means “run effective and safe elections with electronique voting”.
The court observed that these changes in the Indian Constitution are arbitrary and aims at damaging the Rule of Law. The expounded on the understanding of the Basic Structure Doctrine as laid down in the case of Keshavananada Bharti case and included Rule of law, Judicial review, Free and fair elections which is an important part of Democracy and Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 as part of the Basic Structure Doctrine. Moreover, Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court cannot be taken away or abridged without inquiry to the basic and essential postulates of Rule of Law.
HELD:-
Clause (4) of the 39th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1975 is unconstitutional and void as being in violation of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
