The emergency provisions drew from the Weimar Constitution of Germany and the Government of India Act, 1935. Remember Articles 352, 356 and 360.
During the 1975 Emergency, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed was President and Indira Gandhi was Prime Minister. It was proclaimed on the ground of internal disturbance, a phrase replaced by armed rebellion through the 44th Amendment.
Approval of National Emergency = Special Majority (2/3rd + majority of total membership). Revocation = Simple Majority of LS. Different majorities for passing vs revoking — classic MCQ trap!
Minerva Mills Case (1980) — Emergency subject to Judicial Review. SC can review whether grounds for Emergency were valid. Courts are NOT completely shut out during Emergency.
Art. 355 — Duty of Union to protect states from external aggression & internal disturbance, and to ensure governance in accordance with Constitution.
A National Emergency requires parliamentary approval by special majority, while President's Rule requires a simple majority. The President may revoke President's Rule without parliamentary approval.
S. R. Bommai (1994) is the leading judgment on Article 356. The Supreme Court held that President's Rule cannot be imposed arbitrarily and that a floor test should ordinarily determine the government's majority. It is a measure of last resort.
During a Financial Emergency, the salaries of Supreme Court and High Court judges may be reduced despite their normal constitutional protection. India has never proclaimed a Financial Emergency.
Article 358 automatically suspends the freedoms under Article 19 only during an Emergency declared on grounds of war or external aggression. Article 359 requires a Presidential Order and may suspend the right to move a court for specified Fundamental Rights other than Articles 20 and 21; it can operate during either type of National Emergency.
The 44th Amendment of 1978 expressly protected Articles 20 and 21 during an Emergency. This safeguard followed the suspension of habeas corpus during the 1975 Emergency and the ADM Jabalpur judgment.
| Feature | 🔴 National (352) | 🟠 President's Rule (356) | 🔵 Financial (360) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Grounds | War / Ext. Aggression / Armed Rebellion | Constitutional failure in State | Threat to financial stability |
| Declaration by | President (Cabinet recommendation) | President | President |
| Approval Majority | Special Majority | Simple Majority | Simple Majority |
| Approval Deadline | 1 month | 2 months | 2 months |
| Max Duration | Unlimited | 3 years max | Unlimited |
| Renewal | Every 6 months | Every 6 months | Parliament approval |
| Revocation | Simple Majority of LS | President (anytime) | President (anytime) |
| Effect on FR | Art. 19 auto-suspended | No effect on FR | No FR suspension |
| Art. 20 & 21 | NEVER suspended ✅ | Not affected ✅ | Not affected ✅ |
| State Legislature | Continues (Centre takes extra power) | Suspended/Dissolved | Continues |
| Times Declared | 3 times (1962, 1971, 1975) | Multiple (Max: UP & Manipur — 10 each) | Never declared |
| Key Case | Minerva Mills 1980 | S.R. Bommai 1994 | — |
1. Approval: National = Special Majority · Others = Simple Majority. 2. Deadline: National = 1 month · Others = 2 months. 3. Revocation: National = LS Simple Majority · President's Rule & Financial = President anytime.
Ambedkar warned of the risk of misuse of President's Rule and also hoped that the provision would remain a "dead letter". The statements were made in related but distinct contexts and are both examined.
Safeguards introduced by the 44th Amendment of 1978 include replacing "internal disturbance" with "armed rebellion", requiring the Cabinet's written recommendation, permitting the Lok Sabha to seek revocation, protecting Articles 20 and 21, and requiring approval for each six-month extension.