Evaluate the development of legal principles;
📘 DEVELOPMENT OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES IN INDIA
✅ What are Legal Principles?
Legal principles are foundational rules and doctrines that guide the interpretation, application, and evolution of law. They may arise from:
Constitutional provisions
Statutes (codified law)
Judicial decisions (case law)
Doctrines and jurisprudence
In India, the Supreme Court and High Courts develop legal principles through judicial review, interpretation of statutes, and constitutional adjudication.
⚖️ LANDMARK CASES THAT DEVELOPED LEGAL PRINCIPLES
1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)
Legal Principle Developed: Basic Structure Doctrine
Background:
The Constitution was amended to give Parliament the power to alter any part, including fundamental rights. This was challenged.
Issue:
Can Parliament amend any part of the Constitution, including those affecting its fundamental character?
Held:
The Supreme Court held that:
Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution under Article 368.
However, it cannot destroy or alter the “basic structure” of the Constitution.
Basic features include:
Rule of law
Judicial review
Fundamental rights
Separation of powers
Federalism
Significance:
Created a seminal constitutional principle.
Ensures limited government and protection against authoritarianism.
Courts now review constitutional amendments on the basis of this doctrine.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Legal Principle Developed: Due Process of Law and Fair Procedure under Article 21
Background:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded by the government without any hearing or explanation.
Issue:
Is the “procedure established by law” under Article 21 subject to fairness and justice?
Held:
Yes. The court held:
Article 21 protects the right to life and personal liberty.
The “procedure” must be fair, just, and reasonable, not arbitrary or oppressive.
Introduced the American concept of “substantive due process” into Indian law.
Significance:
Expanded the scope of fundamental rights.
Led to judicial activism in protecting liberties.
Strengthened the principle of natural justice in administrative and criminal law.
3. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)
Legal Principle Developed: Federalism & Judicial Review of Emergency Powers
Background:
President’s Rule was imposed in various states allegedly for political reasons under Article 356.
Issue:
Can the President’s decision to dissolve a state government be reviewed by the courts?
Held:
Yes. The Supreme Court held:
Judicial review applies to the President’s decision under Article 356.
Federalism is part of the basic structure.
Centre cannot use Article 356 to destabilize democratically elected state governments.
Significance:
Strengthened federal principles.
Prevented the misuse of emergency powers.
Reasserted constitutional accountability of the executive.
4. I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007)
Legal Principle Developed: Judicial Review of Ninth Schedule Laws
Background:
Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule were considered immune from judicial review, even if they violated fundamental rights.
Issue:
Can courts review laws under the Ninth Schedule if they violate basic structure?
Held:
Yes. The Supreme Court held:
Any law, including those in the Ninth Schedule, is subject to judicial review.
If such laws violate the basic structure, they can be struck down.
Significance:
Reaffirmed judicial supremacy.
Limited legislative immunity.
Ensured that fundamental rights and constitutional integrity remain protected.
5. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018)
Legal Principle Developed: Right to Equality and Privacy for LGBTQ+ persons
Background:
Section 377 of IPC criminalized consensual homosexual activity. This was challenged as unconstitutional.
Issue:
Does Section 377 violate the right to privacy, dignity, and equality?
Held:
Yes. The Supreme Court:
Decriminalized consensual same-sex relations between adults.
Recognized sexual orientation as part of identity and Article 21 (right to life and dignity).
Emphasized non-discrimination under Article 14 and freedom of expression under Article 19.
Significance:
Historic step toward LGBTQ+ rights in India.
Showed judicial sensitivity to evolving social values.
Court acted as a protector of individual dignity and autonomy.
📊 Summary Table
| Case | Legal Principle Developed | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Kesavananda Bharati (1973) | Basic Structure Doctrine | Limits Parliament's power to amend Constitution |
| Maneka Gandhi (1978) | Due Process & Fair Procedure under Art. 21 | Expanded fundamental rights; introduced fairness in procedure |
| S.R. Bommai (1994) | Federalism & Review of President's Rule | Ensured Centre cannot misuse emergency powers |
| I.R. Coelho (2007) | Review of Ninth Schedule Laws | Reaffirmed that no law is beyond judicial review |
| Navtej Singh Johar (2018) | Equality & Dignity for LGBTQ+ persons | Decriminalized homosexuality; affirmed privacy and dignity |
✅ Conclusion
The development of legal principles in India has been deeply shaped by judicial interpretation, particularly by the Supreme Court. These principles are not static — they evolve based on:
Changing social needs
Constitutional values
Judicial philosophy
Global human rights standards
The courts have consistently ensured that:
Law keeps pace with society.
Power is exercised within constitutional limits.
Rights and freedoms are preserved and expanded.
RELATED Blog
0 comments