Article 13 — Void Laws, Severability, Eclipse & Judicial Review — KSLU Constitutional Law Notes

Article 13 — Void Laws, Severability, Eclipse & Judicial Review

A constitution that declares rights but cannot strike down the laws that violate them is a paper tiger. Article 13 gives rights their teeth — and the courts the sword of judicial review.

• Art. 13(1): pre-constitutional laws inconsistent with Part III are void to the extent of the inconsistency.
• Art. 13(2): the State shall not make any post-constitutional law abridging the fundamental rights; any such law is void.

Two doctrines temper this:

1. Doctrine of Severability — only the offending part of a law is struck down if it can be separated, leaving the valid remainder in force (A.K. Gopalan; R.M.D. Chamarbaugwalla).
2. Doctrine of Eclipse — a pre-constitutional law that conflicts with Part III is not dead but dormant (eclipsed); if the conflicting right is later removed (e.g., by amendment), the law revives (Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M.P., 1955). For post-constitutional laws, the courts have treated such breaches as void from inception (though eclipse has been extended to non-citizens’ situations).

Judicial review — the power of the courts to test laws and executive action against the Constitution — flows from Art. 13 (and Arts. 32/226) and is itself part of the basic structure.