CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

A PROJECT OF
LEGAL METHODS AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

ON

EMERGENCY OF 1975

SUBMITTED TO:

SUBMITTED BY:

Mr Vijayant Sinha

Shreya Sinha

Faculty of Legal Methods

Roll No. - 1648

And Research Methodology

Semester 1st
B.BA LL.B
Session 2016-2021

1 | Page

DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the BB.A. LL.B (Hons.) Project
Report entitled THE EMERGENCY OF 1975 submitted at Chanakya
National Law University, Patna is an authentic record of my work carried out
under the supervision of Mr. Vijayant Sinha. I have not submitted this work
elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for the
contents of my Project Report.

(Signature of the Candidate)

SHREYA SINHA
Chanakya National Law University, Patna
18/10/2016

2 | Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

IF YOU WANT TO WALK FAST GO ALONE

IF YOU WANT TO WALK FAR GO TOGETHER
A project is a joint endeavor which is to be accomplished with utmost compassion, diligence
and with support of all. Gratitude is a noble response of ones soul to kindness or help
generously rendered by another and its acknowledgement is the duty and joyance. I am
overwhelmed in all humbleness and gratefulness to acknowledge from the bottom of my
heart to all those who have helped me to put these ideas, well above the level of simplicity
and into something concrete effectively and moreover on time.
This project would not have been completed without combined effort of my revered Legal
Methods and Research Methodology teacher Mr VIJAYANT SINHA whose support and
guidance was the driving force to successfully complete this project. I express my heartfelt
gratitude to him. Thanks are also due to my parents, family, siblings, my dear friends and all
those who helped me in this project in any way. Last but not the least; I would like to express
my sincere gratitude to our Legal Methods and Research Methodology teacher for providing
us with such a golden opportunity to showcase our talents. Also this project was instrumental
in making me know more about the writ mechanism available for justice delivery. It gave me
a special insight on the Emergency of 1975. It was truly an endeavour which enabled me to
embark on a journey which redefined my intelligentsia, induced my mind to discover the
intricacies involved in proclamation of a national emergency.
Moreover, thanks to all those who helped me in any way be it words, presence,
Encouragement or blessings...

3 | Page

Shreya Sinha

1st Semester
-

B.BA

CONTENTS

Aims and Objectives ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5

Research Methodology -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

Sources of Data ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

Limitations --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Introduction ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6-9

National Emergency ------------------------------------------------------------------ 10-11
Congress and Rise of Indira Gandhi ------------------------------------------------ 12-14
Declaration of Emergency ------------------------------------------------------------ 15
The Emergency Period ---------------------------------------------------------------- 16-22
Post Emergency Period ---------------------------------------------------------------- 23-24
Case Laws ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25-29
Conclusion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30

Bibliography ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31-32

4 | Page

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The researcher aims to:
1. Study and Analyze the situation of India during the National Emergency
declared from 1975-1977.
2. Study the drastic changes the Emergency of 1975 brought in the Indian
Politics.
3. Study the various steps in the proclamation of National Emergency.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This project is based upon doctrinal method of research. This project has been
done after a thorough research based upon intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of the
project.
Sources of Data:
The following secondary sources of data have been used in the project1.

Articles.

2.

Books

3.

Journals

4.

Websites

Method of Writing:
The method of writing followed in the course of this research project is
primarily analytical.
Mode of Citation:
The researchers have followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course
of this project.

LIMITATIONS
5 | Page

The presented research is confined to a time limit of one month and this
research contains only doctrinal works which are limited to library sources.

INTRODUCTION
According to the Indian Constitution, there are three types of Emergencies
which can be declared by the president. They are:
1. National Emergency (Article 352)
2. State Emergency (Article 356)
3. Financial Emergency (Article 360)
National Emergency has been declared thrice in India, in 1962 (Indo-China
War), 1971 (Indo-Pakistan War), and 1975 (declared by Indira Gandhi). Such an
emergency can be declared by the president only on the basis of a written
request by the council of ministers headed by the Prime Minister. The
proclamation is also laid before both the houses of the parliament and also
needs their approval.
Although there were three National Emergencies declared in India, the
Emergency refers mainly to a 21- month period in 1975-1977 when the then
Prime Minister Indira Gandhi uncalled rally had a state of Emergency declared
across the entire country. Officially issued by the then president Fakhruddin
Ali Ahmed under Article 352(1) of the Constitution for internal disturbance.
The Emergency was in effect from 25 th June 1975 until its withdrawal on 21 st
March 1977. The Emergency led to a dramatic turn in the Indian Political
affairs. The democracy was brought to a grinding halt and all the fundamental
rights and legal remedies protected by the Constitution of The Republic of India
were suspended. Indira Gandhi tried to defend the emergency on the grounds
that she was trying to protect the State and Indian People. Nevertheless, her
emergency rule faced immense criticism and is undoubtedly one of the most
controversial periods of the political history of India.
Emergency Provisions
Provisions have been made in the Constitution for dealing with extraordinary
situations that may threaten the peace, security, stability and governance of the
country or a part thereof. There are three types of extraordinary or crisis
situations that are envisaged.
6 | Page

First, when there is a war or external aggression has been committed or there is
threat of the same, or if internal disturbances amounting to armed rebellion take
place;
Second, when it becomes impossible for the government of a State to be carried
on in accordance with the Constitution; and
Third, if the credit or financial stability of the country is threatened.
In each case the President may issue a proclamation with varying consequences.

National Emergency
National emergency can be declared on the basis of external aggression or
armed rebellion in the whole of India or a part of its territory. Such an
emergency was declared in India in 1962 (Indo-China war), 1971 (IndoPakistan war), and 1975 (declared by Indira Gandhi). The President can declare
such an emergency only on the basis of a written request by the Council of
Ministers headed by the Prime Minister. Such a proclamation must be laid
before both houses of Parliament, and the state of emergency expires after one
month unless approved within that time by both houses sitting and voting
separately. However, if the Lok Sabha (the lower house) is not in session when
the state of emergency is declared, and the Rajya Sabha approves of the state of
emergency, the deadline for the Lok Sabha is extended until thirty days after
that house convenes. According to Article 352(6), approval by each house
requires a special majority: those in favour of the motion must be two thirds of
those present and voting, and amount to a majority of the entire membership of
that house. A Parliamentary resolution extends the state of emergency for up to
six months, and it can be extended indefinitely by further resolutions in sixmonthly increments.
During a national emergency, many Fundamental Rights of Indian citizens can
be suspended. The six freedoms under Right to Freedom are automatically
suspended. By contrast, the Right to Life and Personal Liberty cannot be
suspended according to the original Constitution. In January 1977, during the
emergency declared controversially by Indira Gandhi, the government decided
to suspend even the Right to Life and Personal Liberty by dispensing with
Habeas corpus. Justice Hans Raj Khanna defended the Right to Life and asked:
"Life is also mentioned in Article 21 and would Government argument extend to
it also?" The Attorney General observed: "Even if life was taken away illegally,
courts are helpless".

7 | Page

A national emergency modifies the federal system of government to a unitary

one by granting Parliament the power to make laws on the 66 subjects of the
State List (which contains subjects on which the state governments can make
laws). Also, all state money bills are referred to the Parliament for its approval.
During an emergency, the term of the Lok Sabha can be successively extended
by intervals of up to one year, but not beyond six months after the state of
emergency has been revoked.

State Emergency
A state emergency is declared on failure of constitutional machinery in a state.
Every state in India except two states, Chhattisgarh and Telangana has been
under a state of emergency at some point of time or the other. The state of
emergency is commonly known as 'President's Rule'.
If the President is satisfied, based on the report of the Governor of the
concerned state or from other sources, that the governance in a state cannot be
carried out according to the provisions in the Constitution, he may declare an
emergency in the state. Such an emergency must be approved by the Parliament
within a period of two months.
It is imposed for an initial period of six months and can last for a maximum
period of three years with repeated parliamentary approval every six months.
The 42nd amendment act of 1976 extended the initial time duration of state
emergency from 6 months to 1 year. Subsequently, 44th CAA 1978 restored the
1-year period back to 6 months. Originally, the maximum period of operation of
state emergency was 3 years. This 3-year period was divided into 1 year of
ordinary period and 2 years of extra ordinary period for which certain
conditions are to be fulfilled. Therefore, from now on after every 1 year
Parliament needs to approve the same. If the emergency has to be extended for
more than three years, it can be done by a constitutional amendment, as has
happened in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir.
During such an emergency, the President can take over the entire work of the
executive, and the Governor administers the state in the name of the President.
The Legislative Assembly can be dissolved or may remain in suspended
animation. The Parliament makes laws on the 66 subjects of the state list. All
money bills have to be referred to the Parliament for approval. In this occasion
ministers of state legislature do not perform actions in state.
Financial Emergency
8 | Page

Financial emergency under article 360. If the President is satisfied that there is
an economic situation in which the financial stability or credit of India is
threatened, he or she can declare financial emergency. Such an emergency must
be approved by the Parliament within two months. It has never been declared.
Such a situation had arisen but was avoided by putting the gold assets of India
as collateral for foreign credit.
In case of a financial emergency, the President can reduce the salaries of all
government officials, including judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
All money bills passed by the State legislatures are submitted to the President
for his approval. He can direct the state to observe certain principles (economy
measures) relating to financial matters; but fundamental rights cannot be
suspended.
Effects of Financial Emergency
The proclamation of Financial Emergency may have the following
consequences:
a) The Union Government may give direction to any of the States regarding
financial matters.
b) The President may ask the States to reduce the salaries and allowances of
all or any class of persons in government service.
c) The President may ask the States to reserve all the money bills for the
consideration of the Parliament after they have been passed by the State
Legislature.
d) The President may also give directions for the reduction of salaries and
allowances of the Central Government employees including the Judges
of the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
So far, fortunately, financial emergency has never been proclaimed.

9 | Page

NATIONAL EMERGENCY
The Constitution of India has provided for imposition of emergency caused by
war, external aggression or internal rebellion. This is described as the National
Emergency. This type of emergency can be declared by the President of India if
he is satisfied that the situation is very grave and the security of India or any
part thereof is threatened or is likely to be threatened either
(i)
By war or external aggression or
(ii) By armed rebellion within the country.
The President can issue such a proclamation even on the ground of threat of war
or aggression. According to the 44th Amendment of the Constitution, the
President can declare such an emergency only if the Cabinet recommends in
writing doing so.
Such a proclamation of emergency has to be approved by both the Houses of
Parliament by absolute majority of the total membership of the Houses as well
as 2/3 majority of members present and voting within one month, otherwise the
proclamation ceases to operate.
In case the Lok Sabha stands dissolved at the time of proclamation of
emergency or is not in session, it has to be approved by the Rajya Sabha within
one month and later on by the Lok Sabha also within one month of the start of
its next session. Once approved by the Parliament, the emergency remains in
force for a period of six months from the date of proclamation. In case it is to be
extended beyond six months, another prior resolution has to be passed by the
Parliament. In this way, such emergency continues indefinitely. But if the
situation improves the emergency can be revoked by another proclamation by
the President of India.
The 44th Amendment of the Constitution provides that ten per cent or more
members of the Lok Sabha can requisition a meeting of the Lok Sabha and in
that meeting; it can disapprove or revoke the emergency by a simple majority.
In such a case emergency will immediately become inoperative.
10 | P a g e

National Emergency has been declared in our country three times so far. For the
first time, emergency was declared on 26 October 1962 after China attacked our
borders in the North East. This National Emergency lasted till 10 January 1968,
long after the hostilities caused.
For the second time, it was declared on 3 December 1971 in the wake of the
second India-Pakistan War and was lifted on 21 March 1977. While the second
emergency, on the basis of external aggression, was in operation, third National
Emergency (called internal emergency) was imposed on 25 June 1975. This
emergency was declared on the ground of internal disturbances. Internal
disturbances justified impose it in of the emergency despite the fact that the
government was already armed with the powers provided during the second
National Emergency of 1971 which was still in operation.
Effects of National Emergency
The declaration of National Emergency has far-reaching effects both on the
rights of individuals and the autonomy of the states in the following manner :
i. The most significant effect is that the federal form of the Constitution
changes into unitary. The authority of the Centre increases and the
Parliament assumes the power to make laws for the entire country or any
part thereof, even in respect of subjects mentioned in the State List.
ii. The President of India can issue directions to the states as to the manner
in which the executive power of the states is to be exercised.
iii. During this period, the Lok Sabha can extend its tenure by a period of one
year at a time. But the same cannot be extended beyond six months after
the proclamation ceases to operate. The tenure of State Assemblies can
also be extended in the same manner.
iv. During emergency, the President is empowered to modify the provisions
regarding distribution of revenues between the Union and the States.
v. The Fundamental Rights under Article 19 about which you have already
learnt are automatically suspended and this suspension continues till the
end of the emergency.
But according to the 44th Amendment, Freedoms listed in Article 19 can be
suspended only in case of proclamation on the ground of war or external
aggression.
From the above discussion, it becomes quite clear that emergency not only
suspends the autonomy of the States but also converts the federal structure of
India into a unitary one. Still it is considered necessary as it equips the Union
Government with vast powers to cope up with the abnormal situations. The
exigencies of the situation prevailing in the period 1975-77 necessitated certain
11 | P a g e

changes in the Constituion reagarding emergency provisions. Therefore, the

44th amendment was passed on 30th April 1979 to strengthen the democratic
features of the Indian Constituion and to protect citizens rights even during the
national emergency.

CONGRESS AND THE RISE OF INDIRA GANDHI

The Congress Party of India has been historically associated with the political
system of India. It arose as a budding independence movement in 1885 and was
led by Mahatma Gandhi, Vallabhbhai Patel and Jawaharlal Nehru. The congress
party held power in New Delhi and in 22 states from 1947. The party
maintained its dominance through five general elections since 1951-1952. In
1966 after the death of Lal Bahdur Shastri, Indira Gandhi who was the daughter
of Jawaharlal Nehru, was selected as the President of the Indian National
Congress Party. She proved her leadership in the role she played in the 1965
war with Pakistan, which led to the birth of Bangladesh in East Bengal. In 1966
Gandhi beat Moraji Desai by 355 votes to 169 and become the fifth Prime
Minister of India and the first woman to hold that position.
Indiras Congress won 352 seats in the 1971 elections, and her rivals led by the
likes of Morarji Desai were decimated. Success in the Bangladesh war
followed. Although she remained unchallenged in her party and in Parliament,
the mood of the public changed soon afterward triggered by inflation caused
12 | P a g e

by the 1973 oil shock, poor management of foodgrains and commodities, rising
unemployment, and increasing corruption in government. Trade union militancy
peaked with the 1974 railway strike. Agitating students in Bihar were backed by
the Gandhian JP, who came out of retirement to give a call for Total Revolution.
In June 1975, the combined opposition, with the blessings of JP, won the
Gujarat assembly polls.
On June 12, Allahabad High Court ruled on a petition filed by Bharatiya Lok
Dal leader Raj Narain, declaring Indiras election win from Rae Bareli void. As
the Opposition called for her resignation, the PM appealed to the Supreme
Court. The vacation bench of Justice V R Krishna Iyer gave a conditional stay
on the HC order, ruling that she could remain PM, but could not speak or vote in
Parliament pending a decision by a larger bench.
On June 25, at a massive rally in Delhi, JP announced a weeklong satyagraha to
press for Indiras resignation. He also appealed to the armed forces, police and
government employees not to obey the illegal and immoral orders of the
government. That night, Indira Gandhi, reportedly on the advice of then West
Bengal Chief Minister S S Ray, decided to act. The Cabinet was not consulted.
At 8 am on June 26, she made an unscheduled radio broadcast to tell the nation
about the Emergency. Many newspapers in Delhi had had power supply cut off
the previous night, and had not reached readers. They reported the news on June
27.
The entire Congress Parliamentary Party barring five dissidents Chandra
Shekhar, Mohan Dharia, Ram Dhan, Krishan Kant and Laxmikanthamma. All
five were suspended from the party. All Congress state units and Chief
Ministers passed resolutions declaring faith in Indiras leadership. The CPI
wholeheartedly supported the Emergency, and the Soviet Union described it as a
blow to a right-wing plot.
13 | P a g e

JP was the face of the opposition. The Janata Front (old Congress, Jana Sangh,
Bharatiya Lok Dal, Socialist Party), Akali Dal, CPM and DMK openly opposed
it. Nani A Palkhiwala, counsel for Indira in her appeal against the HC ruling,
returned the brief. Fali Nariman, who was Additional Solicitor General, quit.
The RSS, Ananda Margis and Jamaat-e-Islami were banned. Naxalites faced the
brunt of police brutality. Freedom fighters including Dr Sushila Nayyar,
Acharya Kriplani and H V Kamath were arrested from Rajghat for protesting on
Gandhi Jayanti. Free JP signature campaigns were launched in the US and
UK. Advertisements taken out in The Times of London and The New York
Times. A long march, Indians for Democracy, was taken out from Liberty
Bell, Philadelphia, to the UN in New York.
Supreme Court Justice H R Khanna took a principled stand against attacks on
the Constitution and attempts to subvert justice. He was the only dissenter in the
five-member Bench that ruled against habeas corpus, allowing the government
to detain a person indefinitely.

Allahabad Conviction

Raj Narain, a socialist who was recently defeated by Indira Gandhi (two to one)
in the Rae Bareilly parliamentary constituency of Uttar Pradesh, submitted to
the Allahabad High Court charges of corruption in the election process against
Mrs. Gandhi. In 1974, Jayaprakash Narayan, ex-congressman, ex-socialist
began to organize a campaign in Bihar to oust Indira Gandhi and her congress
party from office on charges of corruption. On June 12th, 1975, Justice
Jagmohanlal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court, found the Prime Minister
guilty on the charge of misuse of government machinery for her election
campaign. The court declared her election "null and void" and unseated her
14 | P a g e

from the Lok Sabha. The court also banned her from contesting in any election
for an additional six years. Some serious charges such as bribing voters and
election malpractices were dropped and she was held guilty on comparatively
less important charges such as building of a dais by state police and provision of
electricity by the state electricity department and height of the dais from which
she addressed the campaign rally. Some of these charges were in reality an
essential part for the Prime Minister's Security protocol. In addition, she was
held responsible for misusing the government machinery as a government
employee. Because the court unseated her on comparatively lesser charges,
while being acquitted on more serious charges, The Times of India described it
as "firing the Prime Minister for a traffic ticket." Strikes by labour and trade
unions, student unions and government unions swept across the country.
Protests led by Raj Narayan and Morarji Desai flooded the streets of Delhi close
to the Parliament building and the Prime Minister's residence.

DECLARATION OF EMERGENCY

Justice Sinha stayed the operation of his judgment for 20 days allowing the
Congress party to elect a successor to the Prime Minister. Unable to find a
competent successor, Mrs. Gandhi, on June 23rd 1975 appealed for complete
and absolute stay which would have permitted her to be a voting Member of
Parliament, as well as Prime Minister. On June 24th 1975 Justice Iyer granted
Indira Gandhi conditional stay. This decision gave rise to outcries of
opposition from the opposition that she should resign. Mrs. Gandhi did not
resign. On the evening of June 25th 1975, JP Narayan called for a civil
disobedience campaign to force the resignation of the Prime Minister. In
response, the authority of the maintenance of Internal Security Act was used in
15 | P a g e

the early hours of June 26th to arrest more than a hundred people who opposed
Mrs. Gandhi and her party. People arrested included JP Narayan, Raj Narain,
Jyortimoy Basu (communist party-marxist), Samar Guha (president of the Jana
Sangha). A proclamation of Emergency was issued on June 26th by President
Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, on the advice of Prime Minister Gandhi. The authority
for calling the emergency was under Article 352 of the Indian Constitution.
Sunch an emergency can be called by the President whenever he is satisfied that
the security of India, or any part of it has been threatened by war, external
agression, or internal disturbance. The actual occurrence of a disturbance is not
necessary, only expected the occurrence of a disturbance. Furthermore, under
Article 352, the Courts may not inquire into the validity of the grounds upon
which emergency was called. The powers given to the Central Government
under this form of emergency virtually have no limits.

THE EMERGENCY PERIOD

Between 1967 and 1971, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi came to obtain nearabsolute control over the government and the Indian National Congress party, as
well as a huge majority in Parliament. The first was achieved by concentrating
the central government's power within the Prime Minister's Secretariat, rather
than the Cabinet, whose elected members she saw as a threat and distrusted. For
this she relied on her principal secretary, P. N. Haksar, a central figure in Indira's
inner circle of advisors. Further, Haksar promoted the idea of a "committed
bureaucracy" that required hitherto-impartial government officials to be
"committed" to ideology of the ruling party of the day.
Within the Congress, Indira ruthlessly outmanoeuvred her rivals, forcing the
party to split in 1969into the Congress (O) (comprising the old-guard known
as the "Syndicate") and her Congress (R). A majority of the All-India Congress
Committee and Congress MPs sided with the prime minister. Indira's party was
of a different breed from the Congress of old, which had been a robust
institution with traditions of internal democracy. In the Congress (R), on the
other hand, members quickly realised that their progress within the ranks
16 | P a g e

depended solely on their loyalty to Indira Gandhi and her family, and
ostentatious displays of sycophancy became routine. In the coming years,
Indira's influence was such that she could install hand-picked loyalists as chief
ministers of states, rather than they being elected by the Congress legislative
party.
Indira's ascent was backed by her charismatic appeal among the masses that was
aided by her government's near-radical leftward turns. These include the July
1969 nationalisation of several major banks and the September 1970 abolition
of the privy purse; these were often done suddenly, via ordinance, to the
universal shock of her opponents. Subsequently, unlike the Syndicate and other
opponents, Indira was seen as "standing for socialism in economics and
secularism in matters of religion, as being pro-poor and for the development of
the nation as a whole." The prime minister was especially adored by the
disadvantaged sectionsthe poor, Dalits, women and minorities. For them, she
was their Indira Amma, a personification of Mother India.
In the 1971 general elections, the people rallied behind Indira's populist slogan
of Garibi Hatao! (get rid of poverty!) to award her a huge majority (352 seats
out of 518). "By the margin of its victory," historian Ramachandra Guha later
wrote, Congress (R) came to be known as the real Congress, "requiring no
qualifying suffix." In December 1971, under her proactive war leadership, India
routed arch-enemy Pakistan in a war that led to the independence of
Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan. Awarded the Bharat Ratna the next month,
she was at her greatest peak; for her biographer Inder Malhotra, "The
Economist's description of her as the 'Empress of India' seemed apt." Even
opposition leaders, who routinely accused her of being a dictator and of
fostering a personality cult, referred to her as Durga, a Hindu goddess.
Increasing Government Control of the Judiciary
In the Golaknath case, the Supreme Court said that the Constitution could not
be amended by Parliament if the changes affect basic issues such as
fundamental rights. To nullify this judgement Parliament, dominated by the
Indira Gandhi Congress, passed the 24th Amendment in 1971. Similarly, after
the government lost a Supreme Court case for withdrawing the privy
purse given to erstwhile princes, Parliament passed the 26th Amendment. This
gave constitutional validity to the government's abolition of the privy purse and
nullified the Supreme Court's order.
This judiciaryexecutive battle would continue in the landmark Kesavananda
Bharati case, where the 24th Amendment was called into question. With a
wafer-thin majority of 7 to 6, the bench of the Supreme Court restricted
Parliament's amendment power by stating it could not be used to alter the "basic
structure" of the Constitution. Subsequently, Prime Minister Gandhi made A. N.
17 | P a g e

Raythe senior most judge amongst those in the minority in Kesavananda

BharatiChief Justice of India. Ray superseded three judges more senior to
himJ. M. Shelat, K.S. Hegde and Groverall members of the majority
in Kesavananda Bharati. Indira Gandhi's tendency to control the judiciary met
with severe criticism, both from the press and political opponents such
as Jayaprakash Narayan ("JP").
Political Unrest
During 197375, political unrest against the Indira Gandhi government
increased across the country. (This led some Congress party leaders to demand
for a move towards a presidential system, with a more powerful directly elected
executive.) The most significant of the initial such movement was the Nav
Nirman movement in Gujarat, between December 1973 and March 1974.
Student unrest against the state's education minister ultimately forced the central
government to dissolve the state legislature, leading to the resignation of the
chief minister, Chimanbhai Patel, and the imposition of President's rule. After
the re-elections in June 1975, Gandhi's party was defeated by the Janata
alliance, formed by parties opposed to the ruling Congress party.
In MarchApril 1974, a student agitation by the Bihar Chatra Sangharsh Samiti
received the support of Gandhian socialist Jayaprakash Narayan, referred to
as JP, against the Bihar government. In April 1974, in Patna, JP called for "total
revolution," asking students, peasants, and labour organisations to nonviolently transform Indian society. He also demanded the dissolution of the state
government, but this was not accepted by Centre. A month later, the railwayemployees union, the largest union in the country, went on a nationwide strike.
This strike was brutally suppressed by the Indira Gandhi government, which
arrested thousands of employees and drove their families out of their quarters.
Even within parliament, the government faced much criticism. Ever since she
took charge as Prime Minister in 1966, Indira Gandhi's government had to face
ten no-confidence motions in the Lok Sabha.
Administration
Indira Gandhi devised a '20-point' economic programme to increase agricultural
and industrial production, improve public services and fight poverty and
illiteracy, through "the discipline of the graveyard". It was famously said that
during the Emergency trains would run on time, employees would still be able
to attend to their duties and work could still be carried out in government
offices. In addition to the official twenty points, Sanjay Gandhi declared his
own five-point programme promoting literacy, family planning, tree planting,
18 | P a g e

the eradication of casteism and the abolition of dowry. Later during the
Emergency, the two projects merged into a twenty-five point programme.
Arrests
Invoking article 352 of the Indian Constitution, Gandhi granted herself
extraordinary powers and launched a massive crackdown on civil liberties and
political opposition. The Government used police forces across the country to
place thousands of protestors and strike leaders under preventive
detention. Vijayaraje Scindia, Jayaprakash Narayan, Raj Narain, Morarji
Desai, Charan Singh, Jivatram Kripalani, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna
Advani, Satyendra Narayan Sinha, Gayatri Devi, the dowager queen of
Jaipur and other protest leaders were immediately arrested. Organizations like
theRashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jamaat-e-Islami along with some
political parties were banned. Numerous Communist leaders were arrested
along with many others involved with their party.
In Tamil Nadu, the M. Karunanidhi government was dissolved and the leaders
of the DMK were incarcerated. In particular, Karunanidhi's son M. K. Stalin,
was arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act. At least nine High
Courts pronounced that even after the declaration of an emergency, a person
could challenge his detention. The Supreme Court, now under the Indira
Gandhi-appointed Chief Justice A. N. Ray, over-ruled all of them, upholding the
state's plea for power to detain a person without the necessity of informing him
of the reasons/grounds of his arrest, or to suspend his personal liberties, or to
deprive him of his right to life, in an absolute manner (the habeas
corpus case'). Many political workers who were not arrested in the first wave,
went 'underground' continuing organising protests.
Laws, Human Rights and Elections
Elections for the Parliament and state governments were postponed. Gandhi and
her parliamentary majorities could rewrite the nation's laws, since her Congress
party had the required mandate to do so a two-thirds majority in the
Parliament. And when she felt the existing laws were 'too slow', she got the
President to issue 'Ordinances' a law making power in times of urgency,
invoked sparingly completely bypassing the Parliament, allowing her to rule
by decree. Also, she had little trouble amending the Constitution that exonerated
her from any culpability in her election-fraud case, imposingPresident's Rule in
19 | P a g e

Gujarat and Tamil Nadu, where anti-Indira parties ruled (state legislatures were
thereby dissolved and suspended indefinitely), and jailing thousands of
opponents. The 42nd Amendment, which brought about extensive changes to
the letter and spirit of the Constitution, is one of the lasting legacies of the
Emergency. In the conclusion of his Making of India's Constitution, Justice
Khanna writes:
If the Indian constitution is our heritage bequeathed to us by our founding
fathers, no less are we, the people of India, the trustees and custodians of the
values which pulsate within its provisions! A constitution is not a parchment of
paper, it is a way of life and has to be lived up to. Eternal vigilance is the price
of liberty and in the final analysis, its only keepers are the people. Imbecility of
men, history teaches us, always invites the impudence of power."
A fallout of the Emergency era was the Supreme Court laid down that,
although the Constitution is amenable to amendments (as abused by Indira
Gandhi), changes that tinker with its basic structure cannot be made by the
Parliament.
In the Rajan case, P. Rajan of the Regional Engineering College, Calicut, was
arrested by the police in Kerala on 1 March 1976, tortured in custody until he
died and then his body was disposed of and was never recovered. The facts of
this incident came out owing to a habeas corpus suit filed in the Kerala High
Court.

Forced Sterilization
In September 1976, Sanjay Gandhi initiated a widespread compulsory
sterilisation program to limit population growth. The exact extent of Sanjay
Gandhi's role in the implementation of the program is somewhat disputed, with
some writers holding Gandhi directly responsible for his authoritarianism, and
other writers blaming the officials who implemented the program rather than
Gandhi himself. The campaign primarily involved getting males to
undergo vasectomy. Quotas were set up that enthusiastic supporters and
government officials worked hard to achieve. There were allegations of
coercion of unwilling candidates too. In 19761977, the program counted 8.3
million sterilizations most of them forced, up from 2.7 million the previous
20 | P a g e

year. The bad publicity led every government since 1977 to stress that family
planning is an entirely voluntary program.

Kartar, a cobbler, was taken to a Block Development Officer (BDO) by

six policemen, where he was asked how many children he had. He was
forcefully taken for sterilization in a jeep. Enroute, the police forced a man
on the bicycle into the jeep because he was not sterilized. Kartar had an
infection and pain because of the procedure and could not work for months.

Shahu Ghalake, a peasant from Barsi in Maharashtra, was taken for

sterilization. After mentioning the fact that he was already sterilized, he was
beaten. He was sterilized for the second time.

Hawa Singh, a young widower, from Pipli was taken from the bus against
his will and sterilized. The infection took his life.

Harijan, a 70-year-old with no teeth and bad eyesight, was sterilized

forcefully.

Uttawar, a village 80 kilometers south of Delhi, woke up to the police

loudspeakers at 3 a.m. Police gathered 400 men at the bus stop. In the
process of finding more villagers, police broke in to homes and looted. Total
of 800 forced sterilizations were done.

In Muzaffarnagar, Uttar Pradesh, on October 18, 1976, police picked up

17 people, nine Hindu and eight Muslims out of which two were over 75 and
two under 18. Hundreds of Hindus and Muslims surrounded the police
station demanding to free captives. The police refused to release them and
used tear gas shells. Crowd retaliated by throwing stones and to control the
situation, the police fired on the crowd. 30 people died as a result.

Criticism against the Government

Criticism and accusations of the Emergency-era may be grouped as:

Detention of people by police without charge or notification of families

Abuse and torture of detainees and political prisoners

Use of public and private media institutions, like the national television
network Doordarshan, for government propaganda

21 | P a g e

During the Emergency, Sanjay Gandhi asked the popular 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.
Forced sterilisation.

Destruction of the slum and low-income housing in the Turkmen Gate

and Jama Masjid area of old Delhi.

Large-scale and illegal enactment of laws (including modifications to the

Constitution).

The Emergency years were the biggest challenge to India's commitment to

democracy, which proved vulnerable to the manipulation of powerful leaders
and hegemonic Parliamentary majorities.

Elections of 1977
On 18 January 1977, Gandhi called fresh elections for March and released all
political prisoners. The Emergency officially ended on 23 March 1977. The
opposition Janata movement's campaign warned Indians that the elections might
be their last chance to choose between "democracy and dictatorship."
In the Lok Sabha elections, held in March, Mrs. Gandhi and Sanjay both lost
their Lok Sabha seats, as did all the Congress Candidates in Northern states
such as Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Many Congress Party loyalists deserted Mrs.
Gandhi. The Congress was reduced to just 153 seats, 92 of which were from
four of the southern states. The Janata Party's 298 seats and its allies' 47 seats
(of a total 542) gave it a massive majority. Morarji Desai became the first nonCongress Prime Minister of India.
The elections in the largest state Uttar Pradesh, historically a Congress
stronghold, turned against Gandhi and her party failed to win a single seat in the
state. Dhanagare says the structural reasons behind the discontent against the
Government included the emergence of a strong and united opposition, disunity
and weariness inside Congress, an effective underground opposition, and the
ineffectiveness of Gandhi's control of the mass media, which had lost much
credibility. The structural factors allowed voters to express their grievances,
notably their resentment of the emergency and its authoritarian and repressive
policies. One grievance often mentioned as the 'nasbandi' (vasectomy)
22 | P a g e

campaign in rural areas. The middle classes also emphasised the curbing of
freedom throughout the state and India. Meanwhile, Congress hit an all-time
low in West Bengal because of the poor discipline and factionalism among
Congress activists as well as the numerous defections that weakened the
party. Opponents emphasised the issues of corruption in Congress and appealed
to a deep desire by the voters for fresh leadership.

Timeline of key events during the emergency

July 1st, 1975, Economic and Social reforms: Civil Liberties were
suspended and the government introduced a mandatory birth control
program. During the emergency, Mrs Gandhis 20-Point programme
promised to liquidate the existing debts of landless laborers, small
farmers and rural artisans. The programme planned to extend alternate
credit to them, abolish bonded labor and implement the existing
agricultural land ceiling laws. It provided house sites to landless laborers
and weaker sections and it revised upwards minimum wages of
agricultural labor. The program also provided special help to the
handloom industry by bringing down the prices, preventing tax evasion
and smuggling, increasing production and streamlining distribution of
essential commodities. It increased the limit of income tax exemption up
to Rs 8000, and liberalized investment procedures.
July 4th, 1975, Four parties banned: The government of India banned
four major religious, political and revolutionary parties and 22 associated
parties with them. These parties included the Anad Marg, Rashtriya
Swayamasevak, the Naxalites and the Jamaa-e-Islami-e-Hind.
August 3rd, 1975: An amendment to the Representation of the People
Act was drafted to clear Indira Gandhi from the Allahabad high court
ruling of June 12th 1975.
August 4th, 1975: A least 50,000 or more people had be jailed in India
since the declaration of Emergency.
August 15th, 1975: Bangladesh President Mujibar Rahaman was
assassinated by Bangladeshi military leaders and this incident gave rise to
new external problems in India.
23 | P a g e

 September 15th, 1975: Delhi High Court ruled that charges must be
entered when arrested under the Internal Security Act.
September 26th, 1975: Constitution (39th Amendment) Bill 1975
allowing the election of a Prime Minister beyond the scrutiny of the
parliament was approved.
January 9th, 1976: The government suspends seven freedoms
guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
February 4th, 1976: Lok Sabha's life extended by one year.
November 2nd, 1976: Lok Sabha passes 42nd Constitution Amendment
Bill making India a socialist, secular, republic and laying down the
fundamental duties of citizens.
January 18th, 1976: The President dissolves Lok Sabha.
March 21st, 1976: Emergency withdrawn.
March 22nd, 1976: Janata Party gains absolute majority.

THE POST EMERGENCY PERIOD

The 21 month Emergency period was long and intensive, enough to leave
permanent scars. The Janta Party was the ruling party after the emergency
ended. The Janta governments response to the natural calamities and old Indian
problems proved no more effective than other methods had been in the past.
Thus social and political discontent was very much present in the postemergency India. It became harder for the government with the increase in
smuggling, strikes and social protests. Also, no satisfactory solution was
produced that insured people that they wont be threatened by Emergency again.
In response to this, the Shah commission was appointed by the new government
on 28th May 1977 to inquire into the allegations of abuse of authority and the
malpractices during the Emergency period. The commission found that Indira
Gandhi had been motivated by considerations of exigency, as there was no
concrete evidence that could warrant the declaration of emergency. She never
24 | P a g e

consulted the cabinet with her decisions and the citizens were denied their basic
freedom.
Charges against the government during the Emergency era:
Wanton detention of innocent people by police without charge or
notification of families.
Abuse and torture of detainees and political prisoners.
Use of public and private media institutions, like the national television
network Doordarshan, for propaganda.
Forced vasectomy of thousands of men under the infamous family
planning initiative. Indira's son, Sanjay Gandhi, was blamed for this
abusive and forcible treatment of people.
Arbitrary destruction of the slum and low-income housing in the
Turkman Gate and Jama masjid area of old Delhi.
Taking these findings into consideration, the Janata governments Home
Minister, Choudhary Charan Sigh ordered the arrest of Indira and Sanjay
Gandhi. The arrest meant that Indira was automatically expelled from
Parliament. However, this strategy backfired disastrously. Her arrest and longrunning trial, gained her great sympathy from many people who had feared her
as a tyrant just two years earlier. Mrs. Gandhi succeeded in defying both the
courts and the government over the alleged improprieties committed even
before the emergency. She began giving speeches again, tacitly apologizing for
"mistakes" made during the Emergency, thus proceeding with her political
comeback in the backdrop of the crumbling rule of the Janata party. This set up
the stage for the 1980 elections, which brought Indira Gandhi back to the office.
Once the emergency was lifted, Congress faced the consequences of the same
combined with the wrath of the general public. Writers wrote books and films
were made about Emergency. Salman Rushdie's 'Midnight Children', VS
Naipaul's ' India: A wounded Country' are some of the many books. Films like
Kissa Kursi Ka were a bold mockery of the dark phase. 'Nasbandi' and
'Aandhi' were some other films that played out the condition of the nation.
It was not just this, but after the Emergency was lifted, Indira Gandhi faced
fierce critisizm for her actions. The result of which showed in the 1977 Lok
25 | P a g e

Sabha Elections where Janata Party under the leadership of Morarji Desai came
to power. Later, Indira was arrested on account of various cases against her.

CASE LAWS
Raj Narain verdict
Raj Narain, who had been defeated in the 1971 parliamentary election by Indira
Gandhi, lodged cases of election fraud and use of state machinery for election
purposes against her in the Allahabad High Court. Shanti Bhushan fought the
case for Narain. Indira Gandhi was also cross-examined in the High Court
which was the first such instance for an Indian Prime Minister.
On 12 June 1975, Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court found
the prime minister guilty on the charge of misuse of government machinery for
her election campaign. The court declared her election null and void and
26 | P a g e

unseated her from her seat in the Lok Sabha. The court also banned her from
contesting any election for an additional six years. Serious charges such as
bribing voters and election malpractices were dropped and she was held
responsible for misusing government machinery, and found guilty on charges
such as using the state police to build a dais, availing the services of a
government officer, Yashpal Kapoor, during the elections before he had
resigned from his position, and use of electricity from the state electricity
department.
Because the court unseated her on comparatively frivolous charges, while she
was acquitted on more serious charges, The Times described it as "firing the
Prime Minister for a traffic ticket". However, strikes in trade, student and
government unions swept across the country. Led by JP, Narain, Satyendra
Narayan Sinha and Morarji Desai, protestors flooded the streets of Delhi close
to the Parliament building and the Prime Minister's residence. The persistent
efforts of Narain were praised worldwide as it took over four years for Justice
Sinha to pass judgement against the prime minister.
Indira Gandhi challenged the High Court's decision in the Supreme Court.
Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, on 24 June 1975, upheld the High Court judgement
and ordered all privileges Gandhi received as an MP be stopped, and that she be
debarred from voting. However, she was allowed to continue as Prime Minister.
The next day, JP organised a large rally in Delhi, where he said that a police
officer must reject the orders of government if the order is immoral and
unethical as this was Mahatma Gandhi's motto during the freedom struggle.
Such a statement was taken as a sign of inciting rebellion in the country. Later
that day, Indira Gandhi requested a compliant President Fakhruddin Ali
Ahmed to issue a proclamation of a state of emergency. Within three hours, the
electricity to all major newspapers was cut and the political opposition arrested.
The proposal was sent without discussion with the Union Cabinet, who only
learnt of it and ratified it the next morning.

ADM JABALPUR v. SHIVKANT SHUKLA

27 | P a g e

It all began by a judgment delivered on June 12, 1975 by Justice Jagmohan Lal
Sinha of the Allahabad High Court. In State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Raj Narain,
the petitioner challenged Indira Gandhis election to the Lok Sabha and
consequent victory from the Rae Barelli constituency in Uttar Pradesh. On June
12, Justice Sinha convicted the then Prime Minister, of having indulged in
corrupt practices and declared her election invalid, which meant she could not
contest elections or hold office for six years. Her appeal to the Supreme Court
only granted her a conditional stay. She could not vote or speak in the Lok
Sabha rendering her dysfunctional. Upon increasing hostility by the opposition
and in desperation to hold on to the chair of the PM, she requested the President
Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed to declare a state of emergency under clause (1) of
Article 352 of the Indian Constitution which he did so obediently on June 26
1975. The government cited a grave emergency existed whereby the security of
India was threatened by internal disturbances. The war with Pakistan that had
just ended (1971) and the drought (1972) were said to have damaged the
economy greatly and paralyzed the nation. On June 27 1975, the exercise of
powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 359 of the Indian constitution were
enforced, within which the right of any person including a foreigner to move to
the court to enforce Article 14 (right to equality), Article 21 and Article 22
(prevention against detention in certain cases) of the Constitution and all the
proceedings pending in any court concerned with the enforcement of the
aforementioned articles will remain suspended for the period of Emergency.
What ensued was a string of illegal and hasty detentions without charge or trial,
including those of the major leaders of the opposition party such as Moraji
Desai, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Jayprakash Narayan and L.K.Advani under the
Maintenance of Internal Security Act, Preventive Detention Law (MISA).
Consequently several writ petitions were filed all over the country. Records
show that nine High Courts ruled in favour of the petitioners stating that even
though Article 21 was not enforceable, a person could still demonstrate that
their detention was not in compliance of the law under which they were
detained, or that the action by the State was mala fide or that it was a case of
mistaken identity. Highly perturbed the government decided to appeal against
these decision in the Supreme Court, which became what is called the
Additional District Manager of Jabalpur vs. Shiv Kant Shukla case or the
Habeas Corpus case.
The main question of the case was whether, under Presidential Orders the High
Court could entertain a writ of Habeas Corpus filed by a person challenging the
ground for his detention. The arguments in Supreme Court began on December
14 1975, before a bench consisting of Chief Justice of India A.N. Ray, Justice
H.R. Khanna, Justice M.H. Beg, Justice Y.V. Chandrachud and Justice P.N.
Bhagwati. They were considered the most respectable and wise judges of the
28 | P a g e

Supreme Court at that time. The Attorney General of India, Niren De began his
arguments in his powerful voice, almost terrorising the court, much like the
Governments rule at that time. No questions were asked until Justice Khanna
asked, Life is also mentioned in Article 21. Would Government arguments
extend to it also? Niren De didnt seem to be hassled by this rather
uncomfortable question and answered swiftly saying, Even if life was taken
away illegally, courts are helpless.
The case was argued for over two months after which judgement was reserved.
It was only after an application was moved for the pronouncement of judgement
that the Supreme Court came out with the following conclusion:
In view of the Presidential Order dated 27th June 1975 no person has any locus
to move any writ petition under Art. 226 before a High Court for habeas corpus
or any other writ or order or direction to challenge the legality of an order of
detention on the ground that the order is not under or in compliance with the Act
or is illegal or is vitiated by mala fides factual or legal or is based on extraneous
considerations.
The judgement ruled in favour of the Government with a four to one majority.
Only Justice Khanna, had the courage to take the right decision in favour of
human nature and liberty. He knew what was as stake. Records state that the
night before the judgement was announced he told his sister that he had made
up his mind and decision and knew that it would cost him the seat of the Chief
Justice of India. He ended his judgment with a strong worded quote: As
observed by Chief Justice Huges, Judges are not there simply to decide cases,
but to decide them as they think they should be decided, and while it may be
regrettable that they cannot always agree, it is better that their independence
should be maintained and recognized than that unanimity should be secured
through its sacrifice. A dissent in a Court of last resort is appeals to the brooding
spirit of the law, to the intelligence of a future day, when a later decision may
possible correct the error into which the dissenting Judge believes the court to
have been betrayed. He knew what the consequences of his actions were to be.
His junior, Justice M.H. Beg superseded him and became the Chief Justice of
India in his stead.
The four others: CJI A.N.Ray, Justice Beg, Justice Chandrachudh and Justice
Bhagwati could not stop themselves from blatantly favouring the Government
in power. A.N. Ray, with his controversial appointment as CJI by Indira Gandhi,
superseding three senior judges in line, worshipped the very ground she walked
on. There are anecdotes narrated of how she used to telephone her and her
personal secretary quite frequently to take advice even on the smallest of
matters. Justice Bhagwati, held up the torch of personal liberty only to dampen
29 | P a g e

it with the diplomacy of the correct reading of the Constitution. Courtroom

records read as him saying: I have always leaned in favour of upholding
personal liberty, for, I believe, it is one of the most cherished values of mankind,
without it life would not be worth living. It is one of the pillars of free
democratic society. Men have readily laid down their lives at its altar, in order to
secure it, protect it and preserve it. But I do not think it would be right for me to
allow my love of personal liberty to cloud my vision or to persuade me to place
on the relevant provision of the Constitution a construction which its language
cannot reasonably bear.
In 1979, after Indira Gandhis rise to power once again he wrote a letter to her
that we all wish he didnt. It read as I am sure that with your iron will and firm
determination, uncanny insight and dynamic vision, great administrative
capacity and vast experience, overwhelming love and affection of the people
and above all, a heart which is identified with the misery of the poor and the
weak, you will be able to steer the ship of the nation safely to its cherished
goal. He
went
on
to
become
Chief
Justice
of
India.
The High Court quietly compiled. Their senior had silenced them. That day has
been referred to as the blackest day in Indian Democracy and rightly so. There
are several similarities between this judgement and Hitlers way of functioning
and his rise to power. The Proclamation of Emergency upon the request of
Indira Gandhi bestowed upon her to rule by decree, suspend elections and curd
fundamental rights. The most significant example in history of a rule by
decree is the Reichstag Fire Decree of 1933. Adolf Hitler convinced German
President Hindenburg to issue a decree to suspend all basic civil rights
indefinitely. This is what paved the way for the consequent Nazi suppression of
its opposition and the one-party rule of the Third Reich. Niren Des straight
faced and calm answer to Justice Khannas uncomfortable question chimes of
the Nazi holocaust. In one instance, CJI Ray went on to almost scold the
counsel for the people detained who brought up Nazi gas chambers to prove
their point. To everyone else except him, this was nothing but an act of
desperation and defensiveness to keep the faade of righteousness on.
The Supreme Court violated all fundamental rights with that decision. It was the
darkest hour of Indian judiciary which struck at the very heart of fundamental
rights. All four judges with the exception of Justice Khanna went on to become
Chief Justices of India. In 2011, Justice Bhagwati expressed regret by saying:
I was wrong. The majority judgment was not the correct judgment. If it was
open to me to come to a fresh decision in that case, I would agree with what
Justice Khanna did. I am sorry. I dont know why I yielded to my colleagues.
Initially, I was not in favour of the majority view. But ultimately, I dont know
why, I was persuaded to agree with them. I was a novice at that time, a young
30 | P a g e

judgeI was handling this type of litigation for the first time. But it was an act
of weakness on my part.

CONCLUSION
31 | P a g e

In conclusion, it is fitting to say that the emergency of 1975 was far

more complex a situation than can be judged purely on the basis of the
personality of a couple of people or the occurrences of a short period
of time. In the same manner, it is also true that its effects belie listing
for they are diverse and numerous. The emergency came in a period when the
existence of democracy in India was at stake. People were ready to live in
an authoritarian set up just to get back the peace and security that went
missing at some point in free Indian history. Yet democracy survived. And,
ironically, post the emergency of 1975, the questions of a presidential
form of government or the wish for an authoritarian government have not
arisen. Whether the emergency precipitated a control centre at D e l h i or w a s
t h e e ffe c t o f s u c h a c e n t r e i s a n a rgu a b l e t o p i c . Wh i l e m a n y
b e l i e v e t h a t t h e emergency was the culmination of power building at the
centre, another school of thought stands convinced that the power to the centre
was only solidified by the emergency. The separation of powers was
certainly powerfully hit by the emergency period. The indiscriminate
supersession of judges, nonsensical judicial decisions in favour of those in
power reeks strongly of the concept of a committed judiciary.
Similarly, the executive becoming a pawn in the hands of those in
power seems to be highlighted by the frenzy with which Sanjay
Gandhis slum demolition and sterility drives were carried out without a single
question asked. Another long term effect that India has suffered because
of is coalition politics. Successive governments have been formed by
resorting to coalitions that often show no ideological cohesion and therefore
give rise to difficulties in making coherent policies. The then head of the
Prime Ministers Secretariat, P. N. Dhar makes an apt conclusion.
Notwithstanding the economic gains of the period, the Emergency
regime did not succeed in bringing about the much-needed reform in
economic policies. Neither did it bring about changes in political practice
that would have made the restoration of democracy possible on a more
v i a b l e b a s i s . T h e g rou p t h a t h a d g ai n e d c l o s e s t p rox i m i t y t o
t h e p r i m e m i n i s t e r d u r i n g t h e Emergency was more interested in
the exercise of power for personal aggrandisement than for larger
political and social ends. Without a clear sense of direction in which to take the
country, they converted the regime into a personal despotism of rule by
sycophants.

32 | P a g e

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS:
P. N. Dhar, Indira Gandhi, the Emergency, and Indian Democracy,
Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1st Edition (2000)
Bipin Chandra, Mridula Mukherjee & Aditya Mukherjee, India After
Independence1947-2000, Penguin Books India, New Delhi, 2nd
Edition(2000)
Granville Austin, Working a Democratic Constitution, Oxford
University Press, New Delhi, 1st Edition (1999)
Ramachandra Guha, INDIA AFTER GANDHI The History of the
Worlds Largest Democracy, Picador, Indian Edition (2008)

ARTICLES:
Balraj Puri A Fuller View of the Emergency in Economic and Political
Weekly Vol. 30 No. 28 (Jul. 15, 1995) pp. 1736-1744.
Balraj Puri Afterthoughts on the Emergency Debate in Economic and
Political Weekly Vol. 35 No. 33 (Aug. 12-18, 2000) pp. 2913-2914
V. A. Pai Panandiker and P. K. Umashankar Fertility Control and Politics
in India in P o p u l a t i o n a n d D e v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w , Vol . 2 0 ,
S u p p l e m e n t : T h e N e w P o l i t i c s o f Population:
Conflict and Consensus in Family Planning (1994), pp. 89-104
Harry W. Blair Mrs Gandhi's Emergency, The Indian Elections of 1977,
Pluralism andMarxism: Problems with Paradigms in Modern Asian
Studies Vol. 14 No. 2 (1980) pp.237-271

33 | P a g e

 Norman D. Palmer India in 1975: Democracy in Eclipse in Asian

Survey Vol. 16 No. 2A Survey of Asia in 1975: Part II (Feb., 1976), pp.
95-110
Sudipta Kaviraj Indira Gandhi and Indian Politics in Economic and
Political Weekly ,Vol. 21, No. 38/39 (Sep. 20-27, 1986), pp. 1697-1708
A a r o n S . K l i e m a n I n d i r a ' s I n d i a : D e mo c r a cy a n d C r i s i s G
o v e r n me n t i n Political Science Quarterly Vol. 96 No. 2 (Summer,
1981) pp. 241-259
Arvind Rajagopal Sangh's Role in the Emergency in Economic
and Political Weekly Vol. 38 No. 27 (Jul. 5-11, 2003) pp. 2797-2798
Oliver Mendelsohn The Collapse of the Indian National
Congress in Pacific Affairs Vol. 51 No. 1 (Spring, 1978) pp. 41-66
K r i s h n a K . Tum m a l a T h e I n d i a n
U n i o n a n d E me rge n cy P o w e r s i n International Political
Science Review Vol.17 No. 4 New Trends in Federalism (Oct.,
1996) pp.373-384

34 | P a g e