Chapter 6

The Crisis of Democratic Order

Background to Emergency
1. Changes have been taking place in Indian politics since 1967.
2. Indira Gandhi had emerged as a towering leader with tremendous
popularity.
3. This was also the period when party competition became bitter and
polarised.
4. This period also witnessed tensions in the relationship between the
government and the judiciary.
5. The Supreme Court found many initiatives of the government to be
violative of the Constitution.
6. The Congress party took the position that this stand of the Court was
against principles of democracy and parliamentary supremacy.
7. The Congress also alleged that the Court was a conservative institution
and it was becoming an obstacle in the way of implementing pro-poor
welfare programmes.
8. The parties opposed to the Congress felt that politics was becoming too
personalised and that governmental authority was being converted into
personal authority.
9. The split in the Congress had sharpened the divisions between Indira
Gandhi and her opponents.

Economic Context
1. In the elections of 1971, Congress had given the slogan of garibi hatao
(remove poverty).
2. However, the social and economic condition in the country did not improve
much after 1971-72.
3. The Bangladesh crisis had put a heavy strain on India’s economy.
4. About eight million people crossed over the East Pakistan border into
India.
5. This was followed by war with Pakistan.
6. After the war the U.S government stopped all aid to India.
 7. In the international market, oil prices increased manifold during this period.
8. This led to an all-round increase in prices of commodities.
9. Prices increased by 23 per cent in 1973 and 30 per cent in 1974.
10. Such a high level of inflation caused much hardship to the people.
11. Industrial growth was low and unemployment was very high, particularly in
the rural areas.
12. In order to reduce expenditure the government froze the salaries of its
employees.
13. This caused further dissatisfaction among government employees.

more shit*
1. Monsoons failed in 1972-1973.
2. This resulted in a sharp decline in agricultural productivity.
3. Food grain output declined by 8 per cent.
4. There was a general atmosphere of dissatisfaction with the prevailing
economic situation all over the country.
5. In such a context non-Congress opposition parties were able to organise
popular protests effectively.
6. Instances of students’ unrest that had persisted from the late 1960s
became more pronounced in this period.
7. There was also an increase in the activities of Marxist groups who did not
believe in parliamentary politics.
8. These groups had taken to arms and insurgent techniques for the
overthrow of the capitalist order and the established political system.
9. Known as the Marxist-Leninist (now Maoist) groups or Naxalites, they were
particularly strong in West Bengal, where the State government took
stringent measures to suppress them.

Gujarat and Bihar Movements

Students’ protests in Gujarat and Bihar, both of which were Congress ruled States,
had a far reaching impact on the politics of the two States and national politics.

Gujarat moment
 1. In January 1974 students in Gujarat started an agitation against rising
prices of food grains, cooking oil and other essential commodities, and
against corruption in high places.
2. The students’ protest was joined by major opposition parties and became
widespread leading to the imposition of President’s rule in the state.
3. The opposition parties demanded fresh elections to the state legislature.
4. Morarji Desai, a prominent leader of Congress (O), who was the main rival
of Indira Gandhi when he was in the Congress, announced that he would
go on an indefinite fast if fresh elections were not held in the State.
5. Under intense pressure from students, supported by the opposition
political parties, assembly elections were held in Gujarat in June 1975.
6. The Congress was defeated in this election.

Bihar moment
1. In March 1974 students came together in Bihar to protest against rising
prices, food scarcity, unemployment and corruption.
2. After a point they invited Jayaprakash Narayan (JP), who had given up
active politics and was involved in social work, to lead the student
movement.
3. He accepted it on the condition that the movement will remain non-violent
and will not limit itself to Bihar.
4. Thus the students’ movement assumed a political character and had
national appeal.
5. People from all walks of life now entered the movement.
6. Jayaprakash Narayan demanded the dismissal of the Congress
government in Bihar and gave a call for total revolution in the social,
economic and political spheres in order to establish what he considered to
be true democracy.
7. A series of bandhs, gehraos, and strikes were organised in protest against
the Bihar government.
8. The government, however, refused to resign.
9. The movement was beginning to influence national politics.
10. Jayaprakash Narayan wanted to spread the Bihar movement to other parts
of the country.
 11. Alongside the agitation led by Jayaprakash Narayan, the employees of the
Railways gave a call for a nationwide strike.
12. This threatened to paralyse the country.
13. In 1975, JP led a peoples’ march to the Parliament.
14. This was one of the largest political rallies ever held in the capital.
15. He was now supported by the non-Congress opposition parties like the
Bharatiya Jana Sangh, the Congress (O), the Bharatiya Lok Dal, the
Socialist Party and others.
16. These parties were projecting JP as an alternative to Indira Gandhi.
17. However, there were many criticisms about his ideas and about the politics
of mass agitations that he was employing.
18. Both the Gujarat and Bihar agitations were seen as anti-Congress and
rather than opposing the State governments, they were seen as protests
against the leadership of Indira Gandhi.
19. She believed that the movement was motivated by personal opposition to
her.

Conflict with Judiciary

1. This was also the period when the government and the ruling party had
many differences with the judiciary.
2. Three constitutional issues had emerged:
- The Supreme Court said that the Parliament cannot abridge the
Fundamental Rights.
- The Court said that Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in
such a manner that rights are curtailed when the Parliament wanted
to amend the right of property.
- The Parliament amended the Constitution saying that it can abridge
Fundamental Rights for giving effect to Directive Principles. But the
Supreme Court rejected this provision also.
3. This led to a crisis as far as the relations between the government and the
judiciary were concerned.
4. This crisis culminated in the famous Kesavananda Bharati Case.
5. In this case, the Court gave a decision that there are some basic features
of the Constitution and the Parliament cannot amend these features.
 6. Two developments further added to the tension between the judiciary and
the executive.
7. Immediately after the Supreme Court’s decision in 1973 in the
Keshavananda Bharati case, a vacancy arose for the post of the Chief
Justice of India.
8. It had been a practice to appoint the senior-most judge of the Supreme
Court as the Chief Justice.
9. But in 1973, the government set aside the seniority of three judges and
appointed Justice A. N. Ray as the Chief Justice of India.
10. The appointment became politically controversial because all the three
judges who were superseded had given rulings against the stand of the
government.
11. Thus, constitutional interpretations and political ideologies were getting
mixed up rapidly.
12. People close to the Prime Minister started talking of the need for a
judiciary and the bureaucracy ‘committed’ to the vision of the executive
and the legislature.
13. The climax of the confrontation was of course the ruling of the High Court
declaring Indira Gandhi’s election invalid.

Declaration of Emergency
1. On 12 June 1975, Justice Jagmohan Lal Sinha of the Allahabad High Court
passed a judgement declaring Indira Gandhi’s election to the Lok Sabha
invalid.
2. This order came on an election petition filed by Raj Narain, a socialist
leader and a candidate who had contested against her in 1971.
3. The petition challenged the election of Indira Gandhi on the ground that
she had used the services of government servants in her election
campaign.
4. The judgement of the High Court meant that legally she was no more an
MP and therefore, could not remain the Prime Minister unless she was
once again elected as an MP within six months.
 5. On June 24, the Supreme Court granted her a partial stay on the High
Court order – till her appeal was decided, she could remain an MP but
could not take part in the proceedings of the Lok Sabha.

Crisis and Response

crisis*
1. The stage was now set for a big political confrontation.
2. The opposition political parties led by Jayaprakash Narayan pressed for
Indira Gandhi’s resignation and organised a massive demonstration in
Delhi’s Ramlila grounds on 25 June 1975.
3. Jayaprakash announced a nationwide satyagraha for her resignation and
asked the army, the police and government employees not to obey “illegal
and immoral orders”.
4. This too threatened to bring the activities of the government to a standstill.
5. The political mood of the country had turned against the Congress, more
than ever before.
6. The response of the government was to declare a state of emergency.

response*
1. On 25 June 1975, the government declared that there was a threat of
internal disturbances and therefore, it invoked Article 352 of the
Constitution.
2. Under the provision of this article the government could declare a state of
emergency on grounds of external threat or a threat of internal
disturbances.
3. The government decided that a grave crisis had arisen which made the
proclamation of a state of emergency necessary.
4. Technically speaking this was within the powers of the government, for our
Constitution provides for some special powers to the government once an
emergency is declared.
5. Once an emergency is proclaimed, the federal distribution of powers
remains practically suspended and all the powers are concentrated in the
hands of the union government.
6. Secondly, the government also gets the power to curtail or restrict all or any
of the fundamental rights during the emergency.
 7. From the wording of the provisions of the Constitution, it is clear that an
emergency is seen as an extraordinary condition in which normal
democratic politics cannot function.
8. Therefore, special powers are granted to the government.
9. On the night of 25 June 1975, the Prime Minister recommended the
imposition of Emergency to President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed.
10. He issued the proclamation immediately.
11. After midnight, the electricity to all the major newspaper offices was
disconnected.
12. In the early morning, a large number of leaders and workers of the
opposition parties were arrested.
13. The Cabinet was informed about it at a special meeting at 6 a.m. on 26
June, after all this had taken place.

Consequences
1. This brought the agitation to an abrupt stop; strikes were banned; many
opposition leaders were put in jail; the political situation became very quiet
though tense.
2. Deciding to use its special powers under emergency provisions, the
government suspended the freedom of the Press.
3. Newspapers were asked to get prior approval for all material to be
published. This is known as press censorship.
4. Apprehending social and communal disharmony, the government banned
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jamait-e-Islami.
5. Protests and strikes and public agitations were also disallowed.
6. Most importantly, under the provisions of emergency, the various
Fundamental Rights of citizens stood suspended, including the right of
citizens to move the Court for restoring their fundamental rights.

extensive use of preventive detention*

1. The government made extensive use of preventive detention.
2. Under this provision, people are arrested and detained not because they
have committed any offence, but on the apprehension that they may
commit an offence.
 3. Using preventive detention acts, the government made large scale arrests
during the emergency.
4. Arrested political workers could not challenge their arrest through habeas
corpus petitions.
5. Many cases were filed in the High Courts and the Supreme Court by and on
behalf of arrested persons, but the government claimed that it was not
even necessary to inform the arrested persons of the reasons and grounds
of their arrest.
6. Several High Courts gave judgments that even after the declaration of
emergency the courts could entertain a writ of habeas corpus filed by a
person challenging his/her detention.

supreme court gave up*

1. In April 1976, the constitution bench of the Supreme Court over-ruled the
High Courts and accepted the government’s plea.
2. It meant that during an emergency the government could take away the
citizen’s right to life and liberty.
3. This judgement closed the doors of judiciary for the citizens and is
regarded as one of the most controversial judgments of the Supreme
Court.

resistance to the emergency*

1. There were many acts of dissent and resistance to the Emergency.
2. Many political workers who were not arrested in the first wave, went
‘underground’ and organised protests against the government.
3. Newspapers like the Indian Express and the Statesman protested against
censorship by leaving blank spaces where news items had been censored.
4. Magazines like the Seminar and the Mainstream chose to close down
rather than submit to censorship.
5. Many journalists were arrested for writing against the Emergency.
6. Many underground newsletters and leaflets were published to bypass
censorship.
 7. Kannada writer Shivarama Karanth, awarded with Padma Bhushan, and
Hindi writer Fanishwarnath Renu, awarded with Padma Shri, returned their
awards in protest against the suspension of democracy.
8. By and large, though, such open acts of defiance and resistance were rare.
9. The Parliament also brought in many new changes to the Constitution.
10. In the background of the ruling of the Allahabad High Court in the Indira
Gandhi case, an amendment was made declaring that elections of Prime
Minister, President and Vice-President could not be challenged in the
Court.
11. The forty-second amendment was also passed during the emergency.
12. Among the various changes made by this amendment, one was that the
duration of the legislatures in the country was extended from five to six
years.
13. This change was not only for the emergency period, but was intended to be
of a permanent nature.
14. Besides this, during an emergency, elections can be postponed by one
year.
15. Thus, effectively, after 1971, elections needed to be held only in 1978;
instead of 1976.

Lessons of the Emergency

1. The Emergency at once brought out both the weaknesses and the
strengths of India’s democracy.
2. Though there are many observers who think that India ceased to be
democratic during the Emergency, it is noteworthy that normal democratic
functioning resumed within a short span of time.
3. Thus, one lesson of Emergency is that it is extremely difficult to do away
with democracy in India.
4. Secondly, it brought out some ambiguities regarding the Emergency
provision in the Constitution that have been rectified since.
5. Now, ‘internal’ emergency can be proclaimed only on the grounds of
‘armed rebellion’ and it is necessary that the advice to the President to
proclaim the emergency must be given in writing by the Council of
Ministers.
 6. Thirdly, the Emergency made everyone more aware of the value of civil
liberties.
7. The Courts too, have taken an active role after the emergency in protecting
the civil liberties of the individuals.
8. This is a response to the inability of the judiciary to protect civil liberties
effectively during the emergency.
9. Many civil liberties organisations came up after this experience.
10. However, the critical years of emergency brought many issues that have
not been adequately grappled with.
11. Secondly, the actual implementation of the emergency rule took place
through the police and the administration.
12. These institutions could not function independently.
13. They were turned into political instruments of the ruling party and
according to the Shah Commission Report, the administration and the
police became vulnerable to political pressures.
14. This problem did not vanish after the Emergency.

Politics after Emergency

1. The most valuable and lasting lesson of the Emergency was learnt as soon
as the Emergency was over and the Lok Sabha elections were announced.
2. The 1977 elections turned into a referendum on the experience of the
Emergency, at least in north India where the impact of the Emergency was
felt most strongly.
3. The opposition fought the election on the slogan of ‘save democracy’.
4. The people’s verdict was decisively against the Emergency.
5. The lesson was clear and has been reiterated in many state level elections
thereafter – governments that are perceived to be anti-democratic are
severely punished by the voters.
6. In this sense the experience of 1975-77 ended up strengthening the
foundations of democracy in India.

Lok Sabha Elections, 1977

1. In January 1977, after eighteen months of emergency, the government
decided to hold elections.
 2. Accordingly, all the leaders and activists were released from jails.
3. Elections were held in March 1977.
4. This left the opposition with very little time, but political developments took
place very rapidly.
5. The major opposition parties had already been coming closer in the
pre-Emergency period.
6. Now they came together on the eve of the elections and formed a new
party, known as the Janata Party.
7. The new party accepted the leadership of Jayaprakash Narayan.
8. Some leaders of the Congress who were opposed to the emergency also
joined this new party.
9. Some other Congress leaders also came out and formed a separate party
under the leadership of Jagjivan Ram.

janata party becums popular

1. This party was named as Congress for Democracy, later merged with the
Janata Party.
2. The Janata Party made this election into a referendum on the Emergency.
3. Its campaign was focused on the nondemocratic character of the rule and
on the various excesses that took place during this period.
4. In the backdrop of arrests of thousands of persons and the censorship of
the Press, the public opinion was against the Congress.
5. Jayaprakash Narayan became the popular symbol of restoration of
democracy.
6. The formation of the Janata Party also ensured that non-Congress votes
would not be divided.
7. It was evident that the going was tough for the Congress.
8. Yet the final results took everyone by surprise.
9. For the first time since independence, the Congress party was defeated in
the Lok Sabha elections.

congress lost*
1. The Congress could win only 154 seats in the Lok Sabha.
2. Its share of popular votes fell to less than 35 per cent.
 3. The Janata Party and its allies won 330 out of the 542 seats in the Lok
Sabha; Janata Party itself won 295 seats and thus enjoyed a clear majority.
4. In north India, it was a massive electoral wave against the Congress.
5. The Congress lost in every constituency in Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi,
Haryana and the Punjab and could win only one seat each in Rajasthan and
Madhya Pradesh.
6. Indira Gandhi was defeated from Rae Bareli, as was her son Sanjay Gandhi
from Amethi.
7. But if you look at the map showing the result of this election, you will notice
that Congress did not lose elections all over the country.
8. It retained many seats in Maharashtra, Gujarat and Orissa and virtually
swept through the southern States.
9. There are many reasons for this.
10. To begin with, the impact of emergency was not felt equally in all the
States.
11. The forced relocation and displacements, the forced sterilisations, were
mostly concentrated in the northern States.
12. But more importantly, north India had experienced some long term
changes in the nature of political competition.
13. The middle castes from north India were beginning to move away from the
Congress and the Janata party became a platform for many of these
sections to come together.
14. In this sense, the elections of 1977 were not merely about the Emergency.

Janata Government
1. The Janata Party government that came to power after the 1977 elections
was far from cohesive.
2. After the election, there was stiff competition among three leaders for the
post of Prime Minister – Morarji Desai, who was the rival to Indira Gandhi
ever since 1966-67; Charan Singh, leader of the Bharatiya Lok Dal and a
farmers’ leader from UP; and Jagjivan Ram, who had vast experience as a
senior minister in the Congress governments.
3. Eventually Morarji Desai became the Prime Minister but that did not bring
the power struggle within the party to an end.
 4. The opposition to emergency could keep the Janata Party together only for
a while.
5. Its critics felt that the Janata Party lacked direction, leadership, and a
common programme.
6. The Janata Party government could not bring about a fundamental change
in policies from those pursued by the Congress.
7. The Janata Party split and the government which was led by Morarji Desai
lost its majority in less than 18 months.
8. Another government headed by Charan Singh was formed on the
assurance of the support of the Congress party.
9. But the Congress party later decided to withdraw its support with the result
that the Charan Singh government could remain in power for just about
four months.
10. Fresh Lok Sabha elections were held in January 1980 in which the Janata
Party suffered a comprehensive defeat, especially in north India where it
had swept the polls in 1977.
11. Congress party led by Indira Gandhi nearly repeated its great victory in
1971.
12. It won 353 seats and came back to power.
13. The experience of 1977-79 taught another lesson in democratic politics:
governments that are seen to be unstable and quarrelsome are severely
punished by the voters.

Legacy
1. Between the elections of 1977 and 1980 the party system had changed
dramatically.
2. Since 1969, the Congress party had started shedding its character as an
umbrella party which accommodated leaders and workers of different
ideological dispensations and viewpoints.
3. The Congress party now identified itself with a particular ideology, claiming
to be the only socialist and pro-poor party.
4. Thus with the early nineteen seventies, the Congress’s political success
depended on attracting people on the basis of sharp social and ideological
divisions and the appeal of one leader, Indira Gandhi.
 5. With the change in the nature of the Congress party, other opposition
parties relied more and more on what is known in Indian politics as
‘non-Congressism’.
6. They also realised the need to avoid a division of non-Congress votes in
the election.
7. This factor played a major role in the elections of 1977.
8. In an indirect manner the issue of welfare of the backward castes also
began to dominate politics since 1977.
9. As we saw above, the results of 1977 elections were at least partly due to a
shift among the backward castes of north India.
10. Following the Lok Sabha elections, many states also held Assembly
elections in 1977.
11. Again, the northern States elected non-Congress governments in which
the leaders of the backward castes played an important role.
12. The issue of reservations for ‘other backward classes’ became very
controversial in Bihar and following this, the Mandal Commission was
appointed by the Janata party government at the centre.
13. The elections after the emergency set off the process of this change in the
party system.

please end this*

1. The Emergency and the period around it can be described as a period of
constitutional crisis because it had its origins in the constitutional battle
over the jurisdiction of the Parliament and the judiciary.
2. On the other hand, it was also a period of political crisis.
3. The party in power had an absolute majority and yet, its leadership decided
to suspend the democratic process.
4. The makers of India’s Constitution trusted that all political parties would
basically abide by the democratic norm.
5. Even during the emergency, when the government would use extraordinary
powers, its use would be within the norms of the rule of law.
6. This expectation led to the wide and open ended powers given to the
government in times of emergency.
7. These were abused during the Emergency.
8. This political crisis was more serious than the constitutional crisis.
9. Another critical issue that emerged during this period was the role and
extent of mass protests in a parliamentary democracy.
10. There was clearly a tension between institution-based democracy and
democracy based on spontaneous popular participation.
11. This tension may be attributed to the inability of the party system to
incorporate the aspirations of the people.