One of the most important contributions made by the Indian judiciary to constitutional law is the Basic Structure Doctrine, which was established in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) ^[1]. Designed to prevent parliamentary excess, it guarantees that although Parliament has broad amending authority under Article 368, it is unable to change the core essence of the Constitution. From Shankari Prasad (1951) and Golak Nath (1967), the doctrine's development is traced in this article. It was consolidated in Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) and Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) ^[3], and it has since been reaffirmed in decisions like the NJAC ruling (2015).

Beyond India, the study takes a comparative and jurisprudential stance, placing the doctrine in the context of international constitutional philosophy. It highlights both similarities and differences with the Indian approach by examining comparisons with Colombia's notion of unamendable principles, Germany's "eternity clause," and South Africa's implicit restrictions on amendment.