VoxJuris
Home › Acts › Constitution › Part XX › Article 368

Constitution of India · Part XX: Amendment of the Constitution

Article 368: Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and procedure therefor

In plain words

Parliament can amend any provision of the Constitution by addition, variation or repeal, using this procedure. An amendment Bill can be introduced in either House, and must be passed in each House by a majority of its total membership and at least two-thirds of members present and voting. The President must then assent to it.

  • Some amendments also need ratification by at least one-half of the State Legislatures: those changing articles 54, 55, 73, 162, 241 or 279A, the Union and State judiciary chapters, Chapter I of Part XI, the Seventh Schedule Lists, States' representation in Parliament, or this article.
  • Article 13 does not apply to amendments under this article.
  • The text says no amendment can be questioned in any court and there is no limit on Parliament's amending power. The Supreme Court has held that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution and has struck down those clauses.

A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.

Read the in-depth explanation, with key Supreme Court rulings ↓

Official text

[(1) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, Parliament may in exercise of its constituent power amend by way of addition, variation or repeal any provision of this Constitution in accordance with the procedure laid down in this article.] [(2)] An amendment of this Constitution may be initiated only by the introduction of a Bill for the purpose in either House of Parliament, and when the Bill is passed in each House by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting, [it shall be presented to the President who shall give his assent to the Bill and thereupon] the Constitution shall stand amended in accordance with the terms of the Bill:

Provided that if such amendment seeks to make any change in—

(a) article 54, article 55, article 73, [ article 162, article 241 or article 279A]; or

(b) Chapter IV of Part V, Chapter V of Part VI, or Chapter I of Part XI; or

(c) any of the Lists in the Seventh Schedule; or

(d) the representation of States in Parliament; or

(e) the provisions of this article,

the amendment shall also require to be ratified by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States *** by resolutions to that effect passed by those Legislatures before the Bill making provision for such amendment is presented to the President for assent. [(3) Nothing in article 13 shall apply to any amendment made under this article.] [(4) No amendment of this Constitution (including the provisions of Part III) made or purporting to have been made under this article [whether before or after the commencement of section 55 of the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976] shall be called in question in any court on any ground.

(5) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that there shall be no limitation whatever on the constituent power of Parliament to amend by way of addition, variation or repeal the provisions of this Constitution under this article.]

Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the official text of the Constitution of India. As amended up to the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023. Text as on 10 September 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.

Understanding this article

Article 368 gives Parliament the power to amend the Constitution and sets the procedure. Its text, after the 42nd Amendment, claims there is no limit at all on that power. The Supreme Court has held otherwise: Parliament can amend any provision, but it cannot destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.

Three kinds of amendment

  • By simple majority, outside Article 368: provisions such as creating new States, which the Constitution itself says are not amendments for this purpose.
  • By special majority under Article 368: a majority of the total membership of each House and two thirds of members present and voting.
  • By special majority plus ratification by half the State legislatures: for federal provisions listed in the proviso, such as the election of the President, the Union and State executive powers, the High Courts, the Lists in the Seventh Schedule, representation of States in Parliament, and Article 368 itself.

The basic structure doctrine

In Kesavananda Bharati (1973), a thirteen judge bench held by a narrow majority that Parliament's amending power, though wide, does not extend to altering the basic structure or framework of the Constitution. The Court did not list every basic feature; it has identified them case by case, including supremacy of the Constitution, democracy, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, and the essence of fundamental rights.

Clauses (4) and (5) struck down

After Kesavananda, Parliament added clauses (4) and (5) to Article 368 to bar courts from reviewing amendments and to declare the power unlimited. In Minerva Mills (1980) the Court struck these down, holding that a limited amending power is itself part of the basic structure. The words remain printed in the text but are of no effect.

The Ninth Schedule

Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule are protected from challenge under Part III by Article 31B. In I.R. Coelho (2007) a nine judge bench held that laws added to the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973, the date of Kesavananda, can be tested against the basic structure, including the essence of Articles 14, 19 and 21.

Key Supreme Court rulings

  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225

    Laid down the basic structure doctrine: Parliament's power to amend under Article 368 does not extend to altering the basic structure of the Constitution. Also recognised that fundamental rights and directive principles are complementary.

  • Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980) 3 SCC 625

    Struck down clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 and the amendment to Article 31C by the 42nd Amendment as violating the basic structure; Parts III and IV together form the core, and a balance between them is itself basic.

  • I.R. Coelho v. State of T.N. (2007) 2 SCC 1

    A nine judge bench held that constitutional amendments placing laws in the Ninth Schedule are open to basic structure review, and that the essence of Articles 21, 14 and 19 is part of the basic structure.

Common mistakes

  • Reading clauses (4) and (5) as valid law. They were struck down in Minerva Mills.
  • Thinking any provision is unamendable. Every provision can be amended, so long as the basic structure is not destroyed.
  • Treating Ninth Schedule laws as fully immune. After Coelho, post 1973 additions can be tested against the basic structure.

Read with: Article 13 Constitution, Article 31B Constitution, Article 4 Constitution

Prepared with AI assistance as a study aid. Every ruling listed was checked against the Supreme Court's own judgments on this site, and quoted words appear in those judgments; linked names open the full judgment. Read the judgments themselves before relying on them. Not legal advice.

Supreme Court judgments citing the article 368