Supreme court ruled that Parliament could not restrict any of the Fundamental Rights of individuals enshrined in the constitution
even during emergency, article 19 stands to be suspended by article 358 while all other fundamental rights are available except those suspended specifically by President under article 359 while proclaiming emergency
it's parliament's duty to enforce DPSP without affecting ambit of FR
aricle 368 merely prescribes procedure for amendment, it can't be source of power to amend constitution
Keshavananda Bharti vs State of Kerala 1973
Biggest case for constitution of india
saved indian constitution from totalitarian encroachment of constitution by parliament
SC pronounced - constitution superior over parliament
Golakhnath case was overruled
Parliament recaptured the power of amending and by virtue of the ammending power cannot change the basic structure of the constitution
prevention of judicial review was declared unconstitutional
Menaka Gandhi vs Union of India 1978
passport of Menaka gandhi was impounded by GoI
declared personal liberty is not just right to life but it is of wildes amplitude covering variety of basic rights to live with dignity
SC declared following right as part of Article 21
right to live with human dignity
right to decent environment
right to livelihood
right to privacy
right to shelter
right to health
right to free education upto 14 years of age
right to free legal aid
right against solitary confinement
right to speedy trial
right against handcuffing
right against inhuman treatment
right against delayed execution
right to travel abroad
right against bonded labour
right against custodial harassment
right to emergency medical aid
right to timely medical traetment in gov. hospital
right not to be driven out of a state
right to fair trial
right of prisoner to have necessities of life
right of women to be treated with decency and dignity
right against public hanging
right to hearing
right to information
right to reputation
Minerva Mills vs Union of India 1980
SC held that
any act of parliament can't take away judicial review as it is basic feature of constitution
there shall be limit to power of parliament to amend constitution
Fortified the idea of the basic structure which was put forward earlier in Keshavananda Bharti case
Waman Rao vs Union of India 1981
Facilitated in determining a satisfactory way of addressing grievances pertaining to the violation of fundamental rights
Mohd Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum 1985
Challenged the Muslim petition law
MC Mehta vs Union of India 1986
Enlarged the scope and sphere of Article 32 and Article 21 to incorporate the Right to healthy and pollution-free environment
Indra Sawhney vs Union of India 1992
Defined the creamy layer criteria and uphold the execution of the recommendations made by Mandal Commission
S.R. Bommai vs Union of India 1994
petition against president rule proclaimation in karnataka under recommendation of governor
challenged misuse of article 356
it refined federal character of constitution
court may interfere
if proclaimation is mala fide
reasons disclosed for making proclaimation
have no reasonalbe nexus with satisfaction of president
article 356 is justified only when there is a breakdown of constitutioanl machinery and not administrative machinery
Basic structure of constitution
supremacy of constitution
sovereign, democratic and republican nature
secular character of constitution
seperation of powers b/w legislature, executive and judiciary
federal character of constitution
unity and integrity of nation
parliamentary system
welfare state
judicial review
freedom and dignity of the individual
rule of law
harmony and balance b/w FR and DPSP
free and fair elections
independent judiciary
limited power of parliament to amend the constitution