Reasearch Project

ON

EFFECTS OF EMERGENCY AND ITS REPURCUSSIONS

Constitutional Law-II (2BL417)

Submitted By:

Vivek Garg

B.A.LLB (HONS) Batch 2016-2021

(16Bal123)

UNDER THE SUPERVISION AND GUIDANCE OF:

Prof. Jagjeet Vashishtha

(Assistant Professor)
 Acknowledgements

I am thankful to the authorities for providing their view and cooperating with me for my research
work. I am also thankful to the respondents who helped in the research work. I am specially
thankful to Dean and Director of ILNU Dr. Purvi Pokhriyal for giving me this opportunity. I
am also thankful to the faculty, Mr. Jagjeet Vashishtha for giving me an opportunity to work
and do the research. I thank to all the people who have directly or indirectly helped me in
conducting the research.
Table of Content

Title Page 1

Acknowledgements 2

Contents 3

Introduction 4-7

1. Statement of Problem 4
2. Review of Literature 5
3. Objectives 6
4. Hypothesis 6
5. Research questions 6
6. Methodology 6

Emergency in India 7-10

1975-Emergency Situation 10-13

Background of Emergency 13

Effects and Criticisms 13-14

Steps Taken during the Emergency

Conclusion

Bibliography 15
Introduction-

1. Statement of Problem:

India is a vast country, in this largest democracy of world, there are many classes of people co-
exist. When we see our country, we can easily find out the diversity which this beautiful land of
gold possesses. The state has many responsibilities which it has to fulfill for the proper
functioning of the country. Much has been said, debated and written on Article 356 of the
Constitution of India. No part of the Constitution has attracted so much controversy as the
provision dealing with the proclamation of the Presidential Rule in the state on the basis of report
by Governor or even without it. Mere satisfaction on the part of President that a situation exists
in a state, which calls for the Proclamation, is sufficient. Emergency Provisions are enshrined
under Part Eighteen of the Constitution of India. The head of the Parliament, i.e., the President
has the power to impose emergency rule in any or all the Indian states if the security of part or all
of India is under the threat of "war or external aggression or armed rebellion". During an
Emergency, the Central government becomes fully potent and the state loses its powers and goes
into the total control of the Centre. The federal structure of the country is converted into the
unitary one without having a constitutional amendment for the same. This transformation of the
political system from a federal system, to unitary during Emergency is a unique feature of the
Indian Constitution. In the same context, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar has observed in the Constituent
Assembly that:

“All federal systems including American are placed in a tight mould of federalism. No matter
what the circumstances, it cannot change its form and shape. It can never be unitary. On the other
hand, the Constitution of India can be both unitary as well as federal according to the
requirements of time and circumstances. In normal times, it is framed to work as a federal
system. But in times of Emergency, it is so designed as to make it work as though it was a
unitary system…”

The researcher is trying to have a descriptive analysis about the situation of emergency and the
presidential rule which is prevalent during the emergency. Also, the paper is tries to focus on the
effects and repercussions that follows the emergency period. There have been many instances
when emergency has been declared in the country, the researcher would highlight those as well
to develop a proper understanding.

2. Review of Literature:

The review of literature gives an idea about the research carried out by other researchers in the
past and also help the researcher to develop his/her idea of research. As a backdrop to the study,
published literature on both, national and international aspects of tribunals are reviewed and
presented in comprehensive capsule. The literature reviewed is as under:

a. M. P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 1247 (7th ed., 2016).

This book has provided an indebt insight about the basics as well as complexes of emergency
provosions. The author cited multiple cases on various occasions to understand each and every
provisions beyond possible doubts. Keeping text in simple language, the author prevented
unambiguous interpretation of any provision. The author has provided multiple landmark
judgments which helps to draw a thin line in determining how and when president’s rule is
imposed in the country (by way of various tests).

b. D.D. Basu, Introduction to the constitution of India (21ed.),Lexis nexis,

gurgaon,2014

This brilliant piece of hard work provide a comprehensive details of each and every provisions
for eliminating the discrimination in the country, be it reservations or something else. It talks
about the various case laws which have happened over the years and also the status of country
today when we talk about emergency and its repercussions.
 c. Mahendra P. Singh, V.N.Shukla’s Constitution of India (12th ed.), Eastern Book
Company

An attempt has been made in this book to comment upon and to explain the constitution of
India. It beautifully covers all the aspects of the topic discussed here and thereby provides a
comprehensive details of each and every provisions in the country.

3. Objectives:
1. To have a detailed and proper understanding of emergency provisions.
2. To develop a proper understanding of president’s rule and its various aspects.
3. To study the effects and casues of such a situation in the country.
4. To understand the possible repercussions that prevail in an emergency oeriod.

5. Hypothesis:

Emergency is something which should be a last option to impose when nothing else is working.
It has its Pros and Cons.

6. Research Questions:
1. Whether emergency should be imposed or not?
2. Whether president’s rule is a better option or the democratic form of government at the
time of emergency?
3. Whether the previous instances of emergency justified or not?
4. Study the repercussions of emergency period.

7. Methodology:
 The research methodology adopted in this project is purely doctrinal in nature. The
researcher will analyse the meaning the term emergency and the related provisions in the
constitution of India . The researcher will also analyse the provisions of the existing and
proposed legislative framework with respect to president’s rule imposed in the society.
There have been many instances in the history of the country when emergency has been
imposed and the researcher tries to analyse the same. The researcher will also observe
various judicial pronouncements and commission reports. There are certain other foreign
jurisdictions, which the researcher will take into consideration in order to draw a
comparative analysis of those provisions with their Indian counterparts.
To collect the information and data for the purpose of reaching to a conclusion for the
hypothesis made, majorly, secondary source of research have been referred such as -
books, articles (both in printed as well as electronic form) and other e-sources. No
empirical research has been carried out and no data collected from empirical research has
been used in this dissertation.
The methods used to carry out this study are descriptive, analytical and diagnostic.

Emergency in India
"Not since India picked up its autonomy from Britain in 1947 had it faced a crisis of such
magnitude and extent," an article in TIME's issue dated June 23, 1975, started, portraying at that
point Prime Minister Indira Gandhi being excluded from her seat in the Indian Parliament
subsequent to found liable of "campaign inconsistencies" in her 1971 re-election.

After two days, on June 25, 1975 Gandhi pronounced a highly sensitive situation in India
refering to grave risk to her legislature and power of the nation from both inner and outer
powers, setting off almost two years of widespread arrests, censorship of the press and severe
curtailment of civil liberties to India's a great many residents. The 21-month time span, referred
to in India basically as Emergency, speaks as one of the darkest times of India's political past.
Such an provision of imposing national emergency is ensured in the Article 352 of Indian
Constitution1 . National crisis is forced amid "war, external aggression or armed rebellion in the
entire India or a part of its region."

1
Article 352 of the Constitution of India, 1950.
The President pronounces national crisis in light of the official demand from the Prime Minister
and the Council of Ministers. The highly sensitive situation lapses following a month unless it's
affirmed by the Parliament inside that stipulated time period. As per Article 352(6)2 , the
majority of both the houses is expected to affirm emergency. The emergency period can be
extended uncertainly by passing resolutions at regular intervals.

Amid a national crisis, a few Fundamental Rights are suspended alongside the Right to Freedom.
Be that as it may, citizens are permitted to make the most of their Right to Life and Personal
Liberty. At the point when national crisis is forced in the nation, a unitary type of administration
happen with Parliament using the ability to set up laws said in the State List. In addition, the state
cash bills are alluded to the Parliament for its endorsement. Amid national crisis, the term of the
Lok Sabha can be extended up to one year.

1975- Emergency Situation

June 25, 1975: Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, who was the president of India at that time, upon advice
by Indira Gandhi, proclaimed a highly sensitive situation i.e. emergency under Article 352 of the
Constitution.

- July 1, 1975: Civil Liberties suspended and the administration presented a compulsory birth
control program. Amid the crisis, Indira Gandhi's 20-Point program guaranteed to liquidate the
extended debts of landless workers, small farmers and craftsmen. The program intended to
stretch out alternate credit to them, annul bonded labour and execute the current land ceiling
laws.

- July 4, 1975: The Government of India prohibited four noteworthy religious, political and
progressive parties and 22 related parties with them. These gatherings incorporated the Anand
Marg, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the Naxalites and the Jamaa-e-Islami-e-Hind.

- July 22, 1975: The 38th Amendment barred the judicial review of the emergency.

- August, 1975: A change to the Representation of the People Act was drafted to clear Indira
Gandhi from the Allahabad high court decision of June 12th 1975.

- August 4, 1975: A minimum of 50,000 individuals had been imprisoned in India since
Emergency.

- August 15, 1975: Bangladesh President, at that time, Mujibar Rahaman was killed by
Bangladeshi military pioneers and groups and this episode offered ascend to new outside issues
in India.
2
Article 352(6) of the Constitution of India, 1950.
- September 15, 1975: Delhi High Court decided that charges must be entered when arrested
under the Internal Security Act.

- September 26, 1975: The 39th Constitution Amendment stated that the election of the prime
minister couldn't be challenged by the Supreme Court and by a body constituted by Parliament.

- January 9, 1976: The legislature suspends seven freedoms enshrined in Article 19 of the
Constitution of India.

- February 4, 1976: Lok Sabha's life incresed by one year.

- November 2, 1976: Lok Sabha passed 42nd Constitution Amendment Bill which made India a
socialist, secular, republic and set out the major fundamental duties of citizens.

- January 18, 1977: The President dissolves Lok Sabha. General elections declared.

- March 21, 1977: Emergency was pulled back.

- March 1977: Janata Party gained absolute majority. this is for the first time since India picked
up autonomy in 1947, a party other than the Congress would represent the Center.

- March 24, 1977: Morarji Desai becomes the Prime Minister of India.

Background of Emergency
From the very beginning, there was a conflict between the Legislature and the Judiciary in India.
Quickly after autonomy, the legislature in perspective of its socialist strategy carried out land
reforms. Land was procured by the government.

By then, Right to property was still a Fundamental Right. lot of amendments were made
including expulsion of Right to property from Part III (It is presently a legal right), formation of
IXth schedule3 (A schedule in the Constitution that offers immunity to laws. If a law is placed in
the IXth schedule, it can't be tested on the grounds of infringement of Fundamental Rights).

The Supreme Court at first was pro government as it saw these changes as important. In the
instances of Sajjan Singh4 and Shankari Prasad5 , in this way, the Union of India won.

I.C. Golaknath v. Territory of Punjab6

3
IXth Schedule of the Constitution of India, 1950.
4
Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 1965 AIR 845; 1965 SCR (1) 933).
5
Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, AIR 1951 SC 455.
6
I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967 AIR 1643; 1967 SCR (2) 762.
This was a historic point case in which the Petitioner won. This was a seat of 11 judges. Sacred
legitimacy of a group of alterations and in addition arrive laws (which were incorporated into the
IXth plan were tested). The inquiry was - Whether the Parliament has boundless energy to
change the Constitution or not.

Article 13 of the Constitution sets out that the State might not pass any law which damages
Fundamental Rights. The importance of the word 'law' came up for elucidation. Did it
incorporate Constitutional changes? That was the second inquiry. On the off chance that it did, at
that point alterations couldn't be made to the Fundamental Rights. On the off chance that it didn't
matter to Constitutional alterations, at that point the Parliament could correct the Fundamental
Rights (even take them away) yet couldn't pass a law that damaged them (Ironically!). The SC
held by a larger part of 6:5 that the word 'law' in article 13 included Constitutional revisions.

Effect and Criticisms-

The impact of this judgment was that Parliament became powerless to change any part of the
Fundamental rights from 14-32. This decision (criticized) brought about making a noteworthy
fracture between the legal and the lawmaking body. It likewise brought about a fight in court that
proceeded through a progression of cases and a considerable measure of legal exchanges.

These landmark cases are –

Privy purses case7,

Benett Coleman Case8,

Bank Nationalization case9,

Kesavananda Bharti case10,

Minerva Mills case11, etc.

1. Police detained the people without any notification of the charges.

2. The detainees and prisoners were subject to abuse and torture.
3. Use of public and private media institutions, like the national television network
Doordarshan, for government propaganda.

7
H. H. Maharajadhiraja Madhav Rao v. Union Of India, 1971 AIR 530; 1971 SCR (3)
8
Bennett Coleman & Co. & Ors v. Union Of India & Ors, 1973 AIR 106; 1973 SCR (2) 757.
9
Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union Of India, 1970 AIR 564; 1970 SCR (3) 530.
10
Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerela, (1973) 4 SCC 225.
11
Minerva Mills v. Union of India, AIR 1980 SC 1789.
 4. Forced vasectomy and tubectomy.
5. The laws which were enacted were done in illegal manner.
6. During the Emergency, Sanjay Gandhi has asked singer Kishore Kumar to sing for a
Congress party rally in Bombay, but he refused. As a result, Information and
broadcasting minister Vidya Charan Shukla put an unofficial ban on playing Kishore
Kumar songs on state broadcasters All India Radio and Doordarshan from 4 May 1976
till the end of Emergency.
7. The inhabitation was damaged and destroyed in the slum area of Delhi city.

Steps Taken during the Emergency-

1970s was the saddest time for many democracies everywhere throughout the world. In the midst
of inflation, unemployment and middleast emergency, democracies over the world pondered a
lot of existential emergencies. In the US, Nixon and Agnew were debilitating the establishment
of US popular government by inside and out gear and defilement. Both the President and Vice
President were compelled to exit in a time of two or three years.

At precisely the same, India confronted a significantly greater existential risk under the dictators.
As her political position debilitated, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi drew out a huge number of
constitutional amendments that undermined the establishment of Indian majority rules system.
As TIME wrote in a piece in its July 14, 1975 issue, three weeks into the Emergency:

‘There was no doubt that India and its imperious Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, were battling
through a political emergency that would significantly influence the nation's future. The highly
sensitive situation, announced on June 26 at Mrs. Gandhi's command, had suspended political
flexibilities and given her dictatorial powers.’

In the Golaknath case, the Supreme Court said that the Constitution couldn't be revised by
Parliament if the changes influence essential issues, for example, Fundamental rights. To
invalidate this judgment Parliament, ruled by the Indira Gandhi Congress, passed the 24th
Amendment in 1971. Essentially, after the administration lost a Supreme Court case for pulling
back the privy purse given to past rulers, Parliament passed the 26th Amendment. This gave
constitutional legitimacy to the administration's annulment of the privy purse and invalidated the
Supreme Court's order.

This judiciary– official fight would proceed in the point of interest Kesavananda Bharati case,
where the 24th Amendment was raised doubt about. With majority of 7 to 6, the bench of the
Supreme Court passed Parliament's amendment by expressing it couldn't be utilized to adjust the
"fundamental structure" of the Constitution. Hence, Prime Minister Gandhi made A. N. Beam—
the senior most judge among those in the minority in Kesavananda Bharati—Chief Justice of
India. Beam superseded three judges more senior to him—J. M. Shelat, K.S. Hegde and Grover
—all individuals from the greater part in Kesavananda Bharati. Indira Gandhi's inclination to
control the legal met with serious feedback, both from the press and political adversaries, for
example, Jayaprakash Narayan.

Amendment 25 of 1972 enabled the suspension of the privilege to private property enabling the
administration to assume control over anyone's property. Amendment 42 of 1977 significantly
changed the nature of Indian constitution. It changed over a dozen articles and added "socialist
secular" words to the Indian preamble

Freedom were reduced and individuals, particularly of the opposition parties and media, needed
to endure and witness challenging days. Numerous were imprisoned and numerous ended up
silent fearing detainment.

Conclusion-
Emergency provisions are enshrined in the constitution of India under Art 352, 356 and 360.

Art 352- National Emergency

Art 356- State Emergency

Art 360- Financial Emergency

There have been instances in the past when emergencies were applied in India. The 1975
emergency is the instance when president imposed the emergency under the rule of Indira
Gandhi. There are bad effects on the country’s situation when the emergency is imposed in the
country. Amid a national crisis, a few Fundamental Rights are suspended alongside the Right to
Freedom. Be that as it may, citizens are permitted to make the most of their Right to Life and
Personal Liberty. At the point when national crisis is forced in the nation, a unitary type of
administration happen with Parliament using the ability to set up laws said in the State List. In
addition, the state cash bills are alluded to the Parliament for its endorsement. Amid national
crisis, the term of the Lok Sabha can be extended up to one year. It is importamt to understand
that there are both pros and cons which we need to understand to have a proper of knowledge of
the emergency situation. Emergency once imposed do have positive effect and not only negative
effects.
Bibliography-
a. M. P. Jain, Indian Constitutional Law, 1247 (7th ed., 2016).
b. D.D. Basu, Introduction to the constitution of India (21ed.),Lexis nexis,
gurgaon,2014
c. Mahendra P. Singh, V.N.Shukla’s Constitution of India (12th ed.), Eastern Book
Company