Introduction

Article 368 of the Indian Constitution explains how Parliament can amend the Constitution. It appears in Part XX and gives India a clear, detailed process for constitutional change. The framers wanted a balance between flexibility and stability. They ensured the Constitution could adjust to new realities but would not lose its basic identity. Article 368 establishes a special procedure that is stricter than ordinary lawmaking. This procedure protects the Constitution from casual changes and ensures that amendments receive careful consideration.

Parliament exercises a special authority under Article 368 known as “constituent power.” This power is different from ordinary legislative power. Parliament can add, change or remove constitutional provisions only through a formal amendment procedure. An ordinary law cannot alter the Constitution. Even though Parliament holds this strong power, it cannot destroy the basic structure of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has made this limitation clear through landmark judgments.

How Does Parliament Exercise Its Amendment Power?

The constituent power under Article 368 allows Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution. The wording of the Article appears very wide. It even states that once an amendment is passed and the President gives assent, the Constitution “shall stand amended.” However, Parliament must respect the basic structure doctrine. The Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati ruled that fundamental features like the supremacy of the Constitution, secularism, separation of powers, federalism and judicial review cannot be damaged or destroyed. Parliament may amend any provision, but it cannot change the essential character of the Constitution.

This power is carried out only through a constitutional amendment Bill. No other bill or law can touch the Constitution. Parliament cannot amend the Constitution indirectly or by passing an ordinary statute. The amendment process remains formal, transparent and deliberate.

How Is a Constitutional Amendment Bill Introduced?

A constitutional amendment Bill may be introduced in either House of Parliament. Both a minister and a private member can introduce such a Bill. The President’s prior permission is not required. This ensures that the initiation of amendments remains a parliamentary function, not an executive-controlled process.

Once introduced, the Bill must be debated and voted on in each House separately. There is no provision for a joint sitting, even if the two Houses disagree. The framers intentionally avoided a joint sitting because they wanted amendments to reflect broad national consensus. If the Houses cannot agree, the amendment fails. This requirement promotes harmony and discourages hasty revisions.

What Majority Is Required to Pass an Amendment?

Article 368 imposes a special majority requirement. Each House must pass the amendment Bill by two separate conditions. First, the Bill must receive support from a majority of the total membership of that House. Second, at least two-thirds of the members present and voting must support it. This dual requirement makes constitutional amendments far more rigorous than ordinary laws, which need only a simple majority of those present and voting.

The special majority ensures that amendments pass only when a large section of representatives agree. It prevents narrow majorities from altering the country’s foundational document. This strengthens constitutional stability and protects democratic values.

What Happens After Both Houses Pass the Amendment?

After both Houses approve the Bill with the required majority, the Bill goes to the President of India. Article 368 makes the President’s role mandatory. The President cannot refuse assent. Once the President gives assent, the Constitution stands amended according to the provisions of the Bill. The amendment becomes part of the constitutional text on the date of assent. This final step completes the formal amendment process.

What Types of Amendments Exist Under Article 368?

The Constitution provides three types of amendments. The first category includes amendments that require a special majority in Parliament alone. Most constitutional provisions fall under this category. Fundamental Rights, the Directive Principles of State Policy and many structural provisions can be amended only through this special majority, subject to the basic structure doctrine.

The second category includes amendments that require both a special majority in Parliament and ratification by at least half of the State legislatures. This applies to matters that affect the federal structure. These areas include the election of the President, the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States, the representation of States in Parliament and Article 368 itself. The States give consent through a simple majority vote in their legislatures. Once at least half of the States approve, the Bill is ready for Presidential assent. This process recognizes India’s cooperative federalism. It ensures that the Union cannot alter important federal provisions without State participation.

The third category includes amendments made by simple majority, but these are not treated as formal amendments under Article 368. They include matters such as the formation of new States, changes in State boundaries or names and adjustments in certain Schedules. Although these actions affect the structure of governance, they are carried out through ordinary legislative processes. The Constitution explicitly clarifies that such changes do not count as amendments under Article 368.

How Does Article 13 Relate to Constitutional Amendments?

Article 13 states that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void. However, Article 368 contains a clause declaring that Article 13 does not apply to constitutional amendments. Parliament inserted this provision through the 24th Amendment to clarify that amendments are not ordinary laws and therefore cannot be challenged as such.

But the Supreme Court has interpreted this differently. In Kesavananda Bharati, the Court ruled that although amendments are not ordinary laws, they are still subject to the basic structure doctrine. While Article 13 does not directly apply, the Court can still review amendments to ensure they do not damage essential features of the Constitution. This interpretation creates a balance. Parliament retains broad amending power, but it cannot dismantle the core identity of the nation.

The 42nd Amendment tried to widen Parliament’s power by declaring that amendments could not be questioned in any court. But the Supreme Court later struck down these clauses in Minerva Mills. The Court reaffirmed that judicial review itself is part of the basic structure and cannot be removed.

How Has Case Law Shaped Article 368?

The Supreme Court has shaped the meaning of Article 368 through major rulings. In Shankari Prasad, the Court held that Parliament could amend Fundamental Rights. In Sajjan Singh, it repeated this view. But the Golaknath judgment changed the position by ruling that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights under Article 368. Parliament responded through the 24th Amendment, restoring its amending power.

Kesavananda Bharati then created the basic structure doctrine. It allowed Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution but prohibited changes that destroy the Constitution’s basic framework. This remains the foundation of India’s constitutional amendment system. Later, Minerva Mills reaffirmed the doctrine and protected judicial review and balance of power.

For any specific query call at ‪+91 – 8569843472‬

Conclusion

Article 368 maintains the balance between continuity and change. It gives flexibility to the constitutional system while preventing misuse. It also respects India’s federal structure and democratic principles. The special majority requirement ensures broad consensus. The requirement of State ratification protects federalism. The basic structure doctrine protects the core values of the nation.

Together, these elements make Article 368 one of the most important provisions of the Constitution. It ensures that the Constitution remains a living document while staying anchored to its foundational principles.