The Basic Structure Doctrine, developed by the Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), serves as a vital safeguard against the arbitrary use of constitutional amendment powers by Parliament. It ensures that core constitutional values—such as democracy, secularism, the rule of law, and judicial independence—cannot be altered or destroyed. While some argue that this doctrine should be codified into the Constitution for clarity, legitimacy, and protection against authoritarianism, others caution that such codification may limit the doctrine's flexibility and invite political manipulation.

The doctrine's current judicial form allows it to evolve with changing times and challenges. Codifying it may risk freezing its scope and undermining judicial independence. Given its consistent application and acceptance in constitutional jurisprudence, the Basic Structure Doctrine remains effective even without formal textual recognition. Thus, while codification offers certain advantages, it may not be necessary or beneficial; the doctrine’s strength lies in its dynamic and interpretive nature, which should be preserved.