A historic constitutional clash in 1964 saw a 28-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court defending judicial independence against the UP Legislative Assembly’s unprecedented actions.
UTTAR PRADESH: When people think of the largest bench in Indian legal history, they often recall the 13-judge Supreme Court bench in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).
But did you know that the largest bench ever constituted in any Indian court was actually a 28-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court in 1964?
And at the heart of this extraordinary legal battle was one man: Keshav Singh.
The Beginning: A Pamphlet That Shook the Legislature
Keshav Singh, a political activist, circulated a pamphlet criticizing members of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly. The Assembly found his actions contemptuous and sentenced him to seven days of imprisonment. However, Singh refused to back down. Instead, his lawyer, B. Solomon, challenged the detention in the Allahabad High Court, arguing that it violated constitutional rights.
High Court Intervenes: Contempt of Assembly or Unlawful Detention?
On March 19, 1964, a two-judge bench of Justice N.U. Beg and Justice G.D. Sahgal ruled that Singh’s imprisonment was unlawful and ordered his immediate release on bail. This decision infuriated the UP Legislative Assembly, which saw it as an attack on its privileges.
In an unprecedented move, the Assembly charged Justices Beg, Sahgal, and Advocate Solomon with contempt and ordered that all three be arrested and brought before the House—a direct challenge to judicial authority.
The 28-Judge Full Bench: Judiciary Stands Its Ground
Faced with this extraordinary situation, the remaining 28 judges of the Allahabad High Court convened an emergency Full Bench the very next day. In a strong rebuke to the Legislature, they barred the Assembly from arresting the judges and the lawyer, effectively blocking the legislative order.
This was unheard of in Indian legal history—a full court coming together to resist what was perceived as an unconstitutional assault on judicial independence.
The Crisis Escalates: Executive Steps In
With the Judiciary and Legislature now in direct confrontation, the crisis threatened to spiral out of control. Recognizing the gravity of the situation, President Dr. S. Radhakrishnan intervened. On March 26, 1964, he referred the matter to the Supreme Court under Article 143, seeking a definitive ruling on the limits of legislative privilege and judicial authority.
ALSO READ: Allahabad High Court Adjourns Hearing on Gyanvapi Mosque ASI Survey Till April 15th
Supreme Court’s Verdict: No One is Above the Constitution
A seven-judge Constitution Bench, led by Chief Justice P.B. Gajendragadkar, delivered a historic ruling. The court held that:
- The High Court had full authority to grant bail to Keshav Singh.
- Legislative privileges do not supersede constitutional rights.
- A Legislative Assembly cannot punish judges for passing judicial orders.
This ruling firmly established the supremacy of the Constitution over legislative privileges, reinforcing the doctrine of separation of powers in India.
The Legacy: A Defining Moment in Indian Constitutional History
The 1964 case remains one of the most dramatic constitutional showdowns in India’s history. A single activist, a pamphlet, and a legal challenge led to a full-blown institutional crisis, testing the very foundations of judicial independence and constitutional supremacy.
And in the midst of it all, the largest bench ever constituted in Indian legal history—28 judges of the Allahabad High Court—stood united to defend the rule of law
The Keshav Singh case of 1964 was more than just a legal battle—it was a defining moment in India’s constitutional history. It reinforced the judiciary’s independence, upheld the principle of separation of powers, and reaffirmed that no institution, including the Legislature, is above the Constitution.
The unprecedented 28-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court’s historic ruling ensured that legislative privileges could never override fundamental rights. This case remains a powerful reminder that the rule of law prevails over political authority, safeguarding democracy for generations to come.
READ MORE REPORTS ON ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE
