Kesavanandabhartivs State Of Kerala Case Analysis

In special reference No.1 of 2002 , Re, (Gujarat assembly election matter) , the debate in the constituent assembly on article 85 and 174 was looked into. Khare, J .(as the learned chief justice then was) referred to kesavanandabharti case in support of the proposition that the constituent assembly debates are permissible aids in construction to ascertain intention to the constitution. The learned judge observed as follows :
One of the known methods to discern the intention behind enacting a provision of the constitution and also to interpret the same is to look into the historical legislative developments, constituent assembly debates or any enactment preceding the enactment of the constitutional provision.
In kesavanandabhartivs state of kerala, it was held that “constituent assembly debates although not conclusive, yet show the intention of the framers of the
Khanna, J. stated that “the speeches in the constituent assembly can be referred to for ascertaining the history of constitutional provision and the background against which the said provision was drafted. The speeches can also shed light so as to show the mischief that was sought to be remedied and the object that was sought to be attained in drafting provision. But the speeches, according to the learned judge, cannot form the basis for construing the provision of the constitution”.
Khanna, J. made a refrence to the cases wherein the debates in constituent assembly were reffered to by the supreme court. Khanna,J. observed as follows:
“So far as the question is concerned as to whether the speeches made in the constituent assembly can be taken into consideration, the court has in three cases, namely, Golaknath vs State of Punjab , Madhavrao jivajuirao India vs Union of India and Union of India vs H.S. Dhillon taken the view that such speeches can be taken into