The 42nd Amendment: a warning from the Emergency years

 The Forty-Second Amendment to the Indian Constitution is often remembered as a turning point when political power tried to stretch constitutional limits. Passed in 1976 during the Emergency of   Indira Gandhi era, it went far beyond routine reform and attempted to change how power itself was distributed in the Indian system.

The government justified the amendment by arguing that courts were blocking social and economic reform. Supreme Court judgments, especially Kesavananda Bharati (1973), had placed limits on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution. To the ruling establishment, this appeared to weaken an elected government’s ability to act decisively. The 42nd Amendment was presented as a solution — strengthening Parliament, promoting Directive Principles, and ensuring faster implementation of policy.

But the context cannot be ignored. The amendment was passed when opposition leaders were imprisoned, the press was tightly controlled, and public debate was severely restricted. In that atmosphere, the changes reflected executive convenience rather than democratic agreement. By shielding constitutional amendments from judicial review, reducing the powers of the Supreme Court and High Courts, extending the life of legislatures, and shifting authority from states to the Centre, the amendment upset the Constitution’s balance of power.

It also reshaped constitutional priorities. By giving Directive Principles precedence over Fundamental Rights, the amendment risked weakening individual freedoms. Social justice and economic equality are core constitutional goals, but the framers had deliberately ensured that these aims would not override basic liberties. The amendment blurred that careful line.

Yet the story does not end there. The backlash to the 42nd Amendment helped restore constitutional balance. The 44th Amendment reversed several of its most controversial provisions, and later Supreme Court rulings, especially Minerva Mills (1980), reaffirmed that Parliament’s power is limited by the Constitution’s basic structure.

Today, the 42nd Amendment serves as a reminder rather than a precedent. It shows how easily constitutional safeguards can be strained in times of political pressure. More importantly, it underlines a simple truth: democracy depends not only on elections, but on institutions willing to check power — and on governments willing to respect those checks.