Constitution of Bharat: Union and Its Territory: Judgments: Part II

 ere are 10 landmark judgments related to Part I of the Constitution of India between 1976 and 2000:

1. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)

• Significance: The Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, emphasizing that any deprivation of life or personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.

2. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980)

• Significance: The Court held that the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution is limited by the basic structure doctrine, ensuring that the Preamble and the fundamental rights are protected.

3. Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

• Significance: The Court declared the 39th Amendment, which sought to protect the Prime Minister's election from judicial review, as unconstitutional, emphasizing the importance of judicial review and democracy.

4. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)

• Significance: The Court laid down the "rarest of rare" doctrine for awarding the death penalty, ensuring that it is only used in exceptional circumstances.

5. A.D.M. Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976)

• Significance: During the Emergency, the Court held that the right to move any court for the enforcement of fundamental rights was suspended, but this judgment was later overruled by the Minerva Mills case.

6. State of Kerala v. N. M. Thomas (1976)

• Significance: The Court held that reservations for backward classes can be made in government services, emphasizing the principles of social justice and equality.

7. P. Sambamurthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1987)

• Significance: The Court held that the state can regulate religious practices if they are harmful to public order, morality, or health.

8. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)

• Significance: The Court emphasized the importance of judicial independence and the role of the judiciary in upholding the Constitution.

9. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)

• Significance: The Court held that the right to livelihood is an integral part of the right to life under Article 21, ensuring that evictions must be carried out with due process.

10. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007)

• Significance: The Court held that laws violating the basic structure of the Constitution, including the Preamble, are void, reinforcing the principles of the basic structure doctrine.

These cases highlight the evolving interpretation of Part I of the Constitution and the balance between individual rights and state power.