The Basic Structure Doctrine is a judicial doctrine and a constitutional concept that limits the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution of India. It was formally adopted by the Supreme Court of India in the landmark judgment of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala on April 24, 1973. The doctrine emerged to solve the problem of a potential erosion of the Constitution's core identity by a temporary parliamentary majority, particularly after the Parliament passed the 24th and 25th Amendments to expand its amending power.
The mechanism of the doctrine is a limitation on the constituent power of Parliament under Article 368, asserting that the power to amend is not a power to destroy. The Supreme Court, by a 7:6 majority in the Kesavananda Bharati case, ruled that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, but it cannot alter or destroy its fundamental features. The Court determines these "basic features" on a case-by-case basis, which are not explicitly defined in the Constitution. Key features identified as part of the basic structure include the Supremacy of the Constitution, Judicial Review, Separation of Powers, and the Republican and Democratic Form of Government.
The doctrine directly connects to Article 368 and the concept of Judicial Review, which itself is considered a basic feature. Its application was reaffirmed in Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), where the Court struck down sections of the 42nd Amendment that sought to remove judicial review. More recently, in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015), the Court struck down the 99th Amendment Act (NJAC), reaffirming that Judicial Independence is part of the basic structure. The doctrine itself has not been replaced, but its scope was clarified in I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007), which held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 1973 are subject to judicial review if they violate the basic structure.