CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Constitution of India
In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, what did the Supreme Court hold regarding Parliament's power to amend the Constitution?
In Kesavananda Bharati the Supreme Court held that Parliament may amend the Constitution, including fundamental rights, but cannot alter or destroy its basic structure. This created a limit on the amending power, rejecting both unlimited power and a complete bar on amending fundamental rights.
- AParliament can amend any part of the Constitution without limit
- BParliament cannot amend fundamental rights in any manner
- CParliament can amend the Constitution but cannot alter its basic structureCorrect
- DOnly the States can amend the Constitution
Explanation
The Court held that Article 368 gives wide amending power, but it does not extend to destroying or altering the basic structure of the Constitution. The view that Parliament has unlimited power was rejected, and the view that fundamental rights are wholly unamendable was also not accepted.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Constitution of India shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Constitution of India questions
- Under the Constitution of India, the President is elected by an electoral college. Which of the following persons is part of that electoral …
- A Constitution Amendment Bill seeks to change the provisions relating to the representation of States in Parliament. Which procedure must be…
- Which of the following is correct about the Council of Ministers of the Union under Article 75?
- Under the Constitution of India, a Proclamation of National Emergency under Article 352 can be issued by the President on which ground?
- Which of the following Fundamental Rights is available only to citizens of India and not to foreigners?
- Which statement about the Preamble as an aid to interpretation is correct?