Part XVIII — Emergency Provisions

Article 356 — President's Rule

Article 356 permits the President to assume direct control of a state if its constitutional machinery breaks down. Also called President's Rule or Central Rule, it has been used over 100 times since 1950 and is among the most controversial provisions in the Constitution — seen by critics as a tool for the Centre to dismiss opposition state governments.

This article has been amended since its original text.

Timeline

25 June 1975

National Emergency proclaimed

Prime Minister Indira Gandhi declared a state of internal Emergency, suspending fundamental rights and civil liberties for 21 months. The press was censored, opposition leaders were imprisoned, and the 42nd Amendment — later called the 'mini-constitution' — was passed during this period.

Shah Commission Report, 1978

Constitutional text

(1) If the President, on receipt of report from the Governor of a State or otherwise, is satisfied that the government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution, the President may by Proclamation —
(a) assume to himself all or any of the functions of the Government of the State and all or any of the powers vested in or exercisable by the Governor or any body or authority in the State other than the Legislature of the State;
(b) declare that the powers of the Legislature of the State shall be exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament;
(c) make such incidental and consequential provisions as appear to the President to be necessary or desirable for giving effect to the objects of the Proclamation...

Source: Constitution of India, as published by the Ministry of Law and Justice.

History and context

Article 356 was modelled on Section 93 of the Government of India Act 1935 and was included at the insistence of members who feared internal instability. B. R. Ambedkar predicted it would remain a dead letter; instead it has been invoked over 100 times. Its most controversial uses include dismissals of elected state governments — Congress governments dismissed non-Congress states (Naik, 1971; Kerala, 1959) and vice versa. The Supreme Court's landmark ruling in S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) subjected President's Rule to judicial review, held that dissolution of a state assembly was not automatically valid on Proclamation, and required a floor test before dismissal wherever possible.

Amendments

44th Amendment (1978) — Required that imposition of President's Rule be approved by both Houses of Parliament (reversing a 42nd Amendment provision).

Key Supreme Court cases

S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994)

Held that imposition of President's Rule is subject to judicial review; dissolution of state assembly cannot be automatic; floor test required; federalism is a basic structure element.

Rameshwar Prasad v. Union of India (2006)

Applied Bommai; struck down the Bihar Proclamation of 2005; held that pre-election alliances cannot be ignored in assessing ability to form government.

Last reviewed: 1 June 2026

Continue exploring

Explore the questions, politicians, and topics connected to Article 356.