Article 358 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Here is a comprehensive explanation of Article 358 of the Constitution of India, including its purpose, interpretation, and relevant case laws.
🔷 Article 358 – Suspension of Provisions of Article 19 during Emergencies
🔹 Text of Article 358 (as amended):
(1) While a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, nothing in Article 19 shall restrict the power of the State to make any law or to take any executive action which the State would be competent to make or to take but for the provisions contained in that Article.
(1A) [Inserted by the 44th Amendment (1978)] Where such a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation only on account of war or external aggression, the power of the State shall be as stated above.
(2) Any law made as per this article shall, to the extent of such inconsistency, cease to have effect as soon as the Proclamation ceases to operate, except as respects things done or omitted before the law ceases.
🔹 Purpose of Article 358:
Temporarily suspends the enforcement of Article 19 (Fundamental Rights like freedom of speech, movement, assembly, etc.) during a National Emergency.
Empowers the State and Centre to make laws or take executive actions that would otherwise violate Article 19.
🔹 Key Conditions:
| Before 44th Amendment (1978) | After 44th Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 19 was suspended during any type of emergency (including internal disturbances) | Suspension of Article 19 allowed only during emergency due to war or external aggression, not for internal disturbance (armed rebellion) |
| Government had wide powers | Restrictions were introduced to protect civil liberties |
🔹 Key Features:
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Scope | Only applies to Article 19 |
| Applicable During | National Emergency (Article 352), due to war/external aggression only |
| Effect on Laws | Any law violating Article 19 is valid during Emergency |
| Post-Emergency | Law ceases to be effective only prospectively (not retrospective invalidation) |
🔹 Relevant Case Laws on Article 358:
✅ Makhan Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1964 SC 381)
Issue: Validity of laws that violated fundamental rights during emergency.
Held:
Article 358 automatically suspends Article 19 rights during a valid emergency.
No need for specific mention in the law that Article 19 is being overridden.
✅ K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Right to Privacy Case
While the focus was on Article 21, the Court referenced past abuse of emergency powers under Article 358.
It observed the need for safeguards, which was partly addressed by the 44th Amendment.
✅ Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union of India (1996)
Context: Rights during emergency and the balance between national security and individual liberty.
Held:
Parliament has limited powers under Article 358 after the 44th Amendment.
Suspension of Article 19 applies only to war/external aggression, not to all types of emergencies.
✅ ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) — (Now overruled)
This case dealt with suspension of Article 21, but it highlighted the harsh effect of Emergency provisions, including Article 358.
Led to public and judicial criticism, prompting constitutional reform via the 44th Amendment.
✅ Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980)
Court discussed the impact of Emergency on fundamental rights and stressed the basic structure doctrine.
Recognized that even during Emergency, the Constitution must be interpreted in light of democratic values.
🔹 Summary Table:
| Provision | Details |
|---|---|
| Article | 358 |
| Applies to | Fundamental Rights under Article 19 |
| When it Applies | During National Emergency under Article 352 (due to war/external aggression only) |
| Effect | State can make laws/actions violating Article 19 |
| Ends when | Emergency ends (but actions/laws taken before remain valid) |
| Important Cases | Makhan Singh, Minerva Mills, Puttaswamy, ADM Jabalpur |
| Major Amendment | 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978 – Limited application of Article 358 |
🔹 Conclusion:
Article 358 is a powerful provision that allows the government to override fundamental freedoms (Article 19) during an emergency caused by war or external aggression. However, its scope was rightly curtailed by the 44th Amendment after the misuse of emergency powers during the 1975–77 Emergency. The provision reflects the balance between national security and civil liberty in constitutional law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments