Supreme Court judges, top law officers and senior advocates came together at JGLS to re-enact the iconic Kesavananda Bharati case. The event highlighted the Basic Structure doctrine and the continuing debate on judicial independence and parliamentary power.
The OP Jindal Global University hosted a special re-enactment of the historic Supreme Court case Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala on Saturday morning.
The event was held as part of the University’s international convention on judicial independence, alongside the launch of the Nyayabhyasa Mandapam, which the institution describes as the world’s largest moot court. The inauguration was led by Chancellor Naveen Jindal and Vice-Chancellor C Raj Kumar.
ALSO READ: Kesavananda Bharati Case Is India’s Constitutional Backbone, Says CJI Surya Kant
A rare Bench of 13 Supreme Court judges, headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, heard the arguments presented during the re-enactment.
The Bench included Justices PK Mishra, Aravind Kumar, Sanjay Karol, MM Sundresh, Joymalya Bagchi, Dipankar Datta, R Mahadevan, AG Masih and Rajesh Bindal. Four senior members of the legal fraternity appeared as counsel.
Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued for the petitioners, while Attorney General R Venkataramani and Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra represented the respondents.
CJI Surya Kant opened the session by sharing his thoughts on constitutional values and the importance of protecting them.
He remarked,
“Where defects, discord and misinformation multiply, and digital harassment becomes disturbingly routine, integrity and honesty are no longer lofty ideals. They are instruments of survival and firmness born out of experience.”
He explained that the Basic Structure doctrine was not created out of imagination, but discovered through a close study of the Constitution. Looking back at the original 1973 judgment, he said,
“The Supreme Court chose the path of constitutional maturity and morality. It refused to bend the Constitution into the shape of convenience. In that single act, it demonstrated that democracy did not grow old prematurely.”
Beginning the submissions for the petitioners, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi emphasised the relationship between the people, Parliament and the Constitution.
He argued,
“The Constitution is given by the people and to themselves. But the power to decide upon amendments is given to a five-year Parliament, which is ultimately a creature of that Constitution. Therefore, the power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution should not be construed so widely as to allow the alteration beyond recognition of the very document which is the manifestation of the people.”
He added that the Constitution cannot be used to destroy itself, saying,
“A Constitution is not a suicide pact,” and stressed that amendment procedures cannot be misused to “impair, damage or destroy its Basic Structure.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta followed by warning about the dangers of unlimited amendment powers. He posed a hypothetical to explain his concern:
“Suppose the legislature were to have the power of amending the Constitution, which includes the power to amend the Preamble also, and sovereignty is surrendered to an external sovereign, maybe the British Queen. What would happen?”
He argued that Directive Principles are only goals, and they cannot justify taking away fundamental rights. On the Ninth Schedule, he pointed out,
“The twenty-ninth amendment literally takes away judicial review, which is again linked to the protection conferred under Part Three of the Constitution of India.”
Responding for the State, Attorney General R Venkataramani urged the Court to view constitutional interpretation through the lens of democracy and the needs of society. He stated that the priorities of the people and the responsibility of elected lawmakers must remain central.
He argued that adding an extra limit like the Basic Structure doctrine, which does not explicitly appear in the Constitution, would disturb the balance created by the framers.
Expressing concern, he said,
“We have apprehensions that it will appear that the argument about Basic Structure is like clipping the wings of a bird from time to time and then calling the cage its freedom.”
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra supported the Attorney General’s position and questioned whether the Court should interfere with democratic choices. He asked,
“Can we sit in the court and determine the will of the people? The representatives of people are well aware of the grass root issues.”
He emphasised that Parliament expresses the people’s will and must be allowed to function without unnecessary restrictions. Highlighting the spirit of open debate, he said,
“We the people decided that we cannot restrict changes embracing freedom and that freedom comes with debate, discussions. Let us not constrain Parliament from doing its job.”
Justice BV Nagarathna underlined the significance of public trust in the justice system. She said,
“Faith in courts is the most needed thing for the impartial and independent functioning of the judiciary.”
She added that political neutrality and independent decision-making are fundamental principles, noting,
“Independence in conduct, political insulation and impartial decision making are the hallmark of an independent judiciary.”
She further stressed the need for public confidence, stating,
“Independence of judicial thought and conduct must not only be there but also perceived by the public.”
Justice PS Narasimha also reflected on the pressures faced by the judiciary. He observed,
“In every epoch, judiciary faces two temptations – to yield or to overreach.”
The event brought together leading legal minds, top judges and senior practitioners to revisit one of the most influential constitutional decisions in India’s history.
Through the re-enactment, the speakers highlighted the continuing relevance of the Basic Structure doctrine and the ongoing debate over the balance between parliamentary power and constitutional limitations, making the discussion both educational and meaningful for the legal community and students attending the programme.
Click Here to Read More Reports On CJI Surya Kant
