AMENDING POWER IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

AUTHOR – HEMANT MISHRA* & DR. KRITIKA NAGPAL**

* STUDENT AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL

** ASSISTANT PROFESSOR AT AMITY LAW SCHOOL

BEST CITATION – HEMANT MISHRA & DR. KRITIKA NAGPAL, AMENDING POWER IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (7) OF 2026, PG. 598-605, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

The evolution of constitutional and human rights jurisprudence in India reflects a dynamic and progressive transformation shaped by judicial creativity, socio-political developments, and an expanding understanding of fundamental rights. Since the adoption of the Constitution of India in 1950, the Supreme Court of India has played a pivotal role in interpreting and redefining the scope of rights, moving from a formalistic to a more purposive and rights-oriented approach. Initially, in cases like A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, the Court adopted a narrow interpretation of personal liberty. However, this approach underwent a significant shift in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, where the Court introduced the doctrine of substantive due process, thereby expanding the ambit of Article 21.

Over time, the judiciary has developed innovative doctrines such as the Basic Structure Doctrine in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, ensuring that the core principles of the Constitution remain inviolable. Public Interest Litigation (PIL), pioneered in cases like S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, democratized access to justice and enabled the protection of marginalized groups. The Court has also interpreted fundamental rights to include socio-economic entitlements, as seen in Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, thereby bridging the gap between Part III and Part IV of the Constitution.