Basic Structure Doctrine Not Applicable to Ordinary Laws: The Supreme Court ruled that the validity of a law cannot be challenged solely on the grounds of violating the Basic Structure of the Constitution. This doctrine, which protects core constitutional principles, will primarily apply to constitutional amendments.
Upholding State Power to Regulate Madrasas: The ruling came in the context of upholding the Uttar Pradesh Madrasa Education Board Act, 2004. The Court affirmed the state’s authority to legislate on madrasa education.
Specific Constitutional Provisions Must Be Cited: To challenge a law, litigants must demonstrate that it violates specific constitutional provisions related to secularism, rather than relying on the broad concept of the Basic Structure.
Reiterating ‘Indira Nehru Gandhi vs. Raj Narain’ Precedent: The Court referenced the landmark 1975 case, which differentiated between ordinary statutes and constitutional amendments. It emphasized that applying the Basic Structure doctrine to regular laws could lead to excessive judicial intervention in the legislative process.
Chief Justice’s Reasoning: Chief Justice Chandrachud argued that the Basic Structure doctrine involves “undefined concepts” like democracy and secularism. Applying it to invalidate ordinary laws would introduce uncertainty in constitutional interpretation.