Question

Which case placed judicial limits on Article 356?

Hint:

Whenever Article 356 appears in a question, the first case to cite is always \textbf{S.R. Bommai (1994)}. It is the constitutional checkpoint against the Centre’s misuse of President’s Rule.

Answer 1

The case that decisively placed judicial limits on the use of Article 356 (President’s Rule) is S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994). This judgment fundamentally reshaped India’s federal structure and the constitutional understanding of Centre–State relations.
Why is Bommai so important?

Before 1994, Article 356 was widely misused by the Union Government to dismiss State Governments on political grounds.
The Supreme Court held that the proclamation of President’s Rule is subject to judicial review.
The Court declared that the existence of “constitutional breakdown” must be objectively established, not merely asserted by the Centre.
Most importantly, the Court held that the majority of a State Government must be tested on the floor of the Assembly, not through the Governor’s subjective opinion.
Key Principles from Bommai:

Judicial review applies to Art. 356 proclamations.
President cannot use Art. 356 for malafide or extraneous political reasons.
Floor test is mandatory to verify loss of majority.
If the proclamation is struck down, the Court may restore the dismissed government.
Federalism is part of the basic structure.
Thus, S.R. Bommai marks the transition from political discretion to constitutional accountability in the use of Article 356.