Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The question asks us to identify the specific landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India in which the Basic Structure doctrine was expressly formulated.
Step 2: Key Concepts and Approach:
The scope of Parliament's amending power under Article 368 was the subject of a long-standing conflict between the judiciary and the legislature.
We must trace the evolution of this conflict through key constitutional challenges and identify the final synthesis where this doctrine was established.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
• Sankari Prasad (1951): In this early case, the Supreme Court held that the power to amend the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights, was contained within Article 368 and was unlimited.
• Sajjan Singh (1965): The Court reiterated the Sankari Prasad ruling but saw a notable dissent from Justice Mudholkar, who first raised the question of whether the Constitution had basic features that could not be amended.
• Golaknath (1967): A 11-judge bench reversed earlier rulings, holding that Parliament had no power to amend or abridge Fundamental Rights under Article 368.
• Kesavananda Bharati (1973): A 13-judge bench, the largest in Indian history, delivered a 7:6 majority decision. It overruled Golaknath and held that while Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, it cannot alter, damage, or destroy its "Basic Structure."
• Significance: This judgment established judicial supremacy over constitutional amendments and created an implied limitation on Article 368.
Step 4: Final Answer:
The Basic Structure doctrine was expressly laid down in the landmark judgment of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala.